Nikon D600 vs Canon 6D

With Canon having recently announced its take on budget DSLRs, the Canon 6D, the most obvious rival just happens to be the brand new Nikon D600. We’ve already seen how the latter stacks up, at least on-paper, with such great cameras as D700 and D800, but neither of those cameras were direct rivals. Priced at the same relatively low price for a full-frame sensor camera, $2099 body only, Canon 6D is as direct a rival as it can get. Lets see how it measures up against its Nikon counterpart spec-wise. Please keep in mind that this Nikon D600 vs Canon 6D comparison is purely based on specifications. A detailed comparison with image samples and ISO comparisons will be provided in the upcoming Canon 6D Review.

UPDATE: there has been a misleading set of specifications spread throughout the internet, indicating that the top shutter speed of Canon 6D is 1/8000th of a second. It’s incorrect – according to official Canon specifications, the top shutter speed of their newly announced “budget” full-frame camera is 1/4000th of a second.

D600 vs 6D

Please note that this comparison is purely based on official specifications of both cameras. A more thorough and objective analysis with sensor comparisons will be provided in the upcoming Canon 6D Review.

Nikon D600 vs Canon 6D Specification Comparison

Camera FeatureNikon D600Canon 6D
Sensor Resolution24.3 Million20.2 Million
Sensor Size35.9×24.0mm35.8×23.9mm
Sensor Pixel Size5.96µ6.55µ
Dust Reduction / Sensor CleaningYesYes
Image Size6,016 x 4,0165,472 x 3,648
Image ProcessorEXPEED 3DIGIC 5+
Viewfinder TypePentaprismPentaprism
Viewfinder Coverage100%97%
Built-in FlashYes, with flash commander modeNo
Storage Media2x SD1x SD
Continuous Shooting Speed5.5 FPS4.5 FPS
Max Shutter Speed1/4000 to 30 sec1/4000 to 30 sec
Shutter Durability150,000 cycles100,000 cycles
Exposure Metering Sensor2,016-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering II63-zone dual-layer iFCL metering sensor
Base ISOISO 100ISO 100
Native ISO SensitivityISO 100-6,400ISO 100-25,600
Boosted ISO SensitivityISO 50, ISO 12,800-25,600ISO 50, ISO 51,200-102,400
Autofocus SystemMulti-CAM 4800FX11-point AF with 1 cross-type sensor (center, sensitive down to -3EV)
AF DetectionUp to f/8 (center 7 AF points only)Up to f/5.6
Video CapabilityYesYes
Video OutputMOV, Compressed and UncompressedAVI, H.264/MPEG-4 in MOV Format
Video Maximum Resolution1920×1080 (1080p) @ 24p, 25p, 30p1920×1080 (1080p) @ 29.97p, 25p, 23.976p
Audio RecordingBuilt-in microphone
External stereo microphone (optional)
Built-in microphone
External stereo microphone (optional)
LCD Size3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD
LCD Resolution921,000 dots1,040,000 dots
HDR SupportYesYes
Built-in GPSNoYes
Wi-Fi FunctionalityEye-Fi Compatible, WU-1B, UT-1Built-in Wi-Fi
BatteryEN-EL15 Lithium-ion BatteryLP-E6 Lithium-ion Battery
Battery Life900 shots (CIPA)980 shots
Weather Sealed BodyYesYes
USB Version2.02.0
Weight (Body Only)26.8 oz. (760g)24 oz. (680g)
Dimensions141 x 113 x 82mm145 x 111 x 71mm
MSRP Price$2,099 (as introduced)$2,099 (as introduced)

If you remember Nasim comparing the D600 vs D800, the cheaper full-frame choice seemed inferior in several aspects such as AF system and resolution, but given the price tag, it seemed like a fair trade-off. D600 would compliment its bigger brother very well.

We see a very different situation though when comparing identically priced rivals, the Canon 6D and the Nikon D600. Nikon seems to shine as the better of the two, and by quite a margin. First of all, it offers a more sophisticated 39-point AF system with 9 cross-type sensors, while Canon has given its new camera a somewhat outdated 11-point AF with just one cross-type sensor. While Canon interestingly says it is the most sensitive system of all current EOS cameras and is able to focus down to -3EV, which is very dark, we are yet to see if it’s true. Lets try to stay positive and not assume it will be as inferior to Nikon’s 39-point AF as it seems at first glance.

Canon also loses when comparing resolution. While there’s not much real-world, print-noticeable difference between 20 and 24 megapixels, with the launch of 6D, Canon has made clear that there will not be a high-resolution rival to the D800, at least at a similar price point. Due to smaller pixel pitch, high ISO and low-light performance should be a little better than that of Nikon D600, but the difference, again, might not be significant. Nikon uses very good sensors that can perform great at the highest sensitivities, as proven by D800, so things might turn out either way – we will make sure to compare them side-by-side thoroughly.

Canon 6D also doesn’t seem to be as fast as Nikon D600 at 4.5 frames per second max (versus 5.5 frames per second D600 offers). More than that, shutter durability has been rated at 100K clicks versus 150K – that’s as low as the old Canon 500D offers, which also cost about three times less at introduction three years ago. Add an inferior viewfinder with 97% coverage and a single SD card slot, lack of pop-up flash (important for some, while some will prefer better sealing), inferior video specifications (which used to be Canon’s playground – now Nikon offers uncompressed video via HDMI), and you’ve got a camera that should have either been launched a year ago (at least), or priced lower. The only real advantages (and, to be fair, modern, should-be-standard features) 6D offers are built-in GPS and Wi-Fi functionality. It’s almost as if Canon either wasn’t trying, or wasn’t expecting Nikon to launch the D600. If the latter is the case, they missed, as many have said before me, the worst kept secret in the history of DSLRs.

Don’t get me wrong. The Canon 6D is likely going to sell quite well. It is also likely that the price will drop much faster than that of D600 (as previously seen with 5D Mark II and Nikon D700). It’s not a bad camera, it’s just worse than Nikon D600 at almost every important aspect you can find. At least on paper.

We hope to get our hands on the Canon 6D as soon as we can (looks like it won’t be shipping for a while) and hopefully prove ourselves wrong!

A SIDE NOTE: our team wanted to love this camera. After all, along with the D600, it marks the beginning of affordable full-frame cameras, and prices should only go down further on. As we are turning our attention not only towards Nikon, but also Fujifilm, Sony, and Canon, we wanted users of the latter to feel welcome and appreciated, and least of all did we intend to bash the newest Canon product, which also happens to be an otherwise amazing, affordable full-frame camera. The only problem is that the 6D, is not as good as its direct rival, the D600, based on specs alone. It’s as simple as that. Don’t take our opinion offensively – we are sure it will sell very well and deliver great images to many photographers. But for those price/performance conscious, Nikon D600, ultimately, seems to offer more, at least until we get a chance to properly review both.


  1. 1) St.
    September 18, 2012 at 12:55 am

    Good article, Roman.
    You’re right – I have the same thoughts – so far (at least on paper) 6D is losing in all aspects over D600.
    I have D800, and I would buy D600 with a pleasure. Not 6D.
    Except if I want to shoot lightnings outside, so I don’t feel sorry if something gets wrong :-)))
    Or may be I will choose the Lumix GH3 for that??
    Either way – this was unexpected from Canon – seems they rushed the release of 6D just to compete with D600, but the only ace they have is the Wi-Fi+GPS, which for me (both) are not something I want in my DSLR, but more in my NEX system I bring with me every day.

  2. 2) Abdul Rahman
    September 18, 2012 at 12:57 am

    I agree that while the 6D is good but I think Canon dropped the ball on this one. Truly a shame as Canon is such a capable company in matching Nikon in almost every aspect of camera making.

  3. 3) Hoeras
    September 18, 2012 at 1:04 am

    Nikon D600 !!!
    But by a very short nose.
    Actually, for me, won it in a flash.
    Pun intended. :-)

    • 3.1) Tim
      September 18, 2012 at 9:05 pm

      And the winner is … the Nikon D600 … BY A VERY LONG NOSE!!!! LOL!!!

      • 3.1.1) Hoeras
        September 18, 2012 at 10:33 pm

        I am starting to form that view too.

        I count six important areas where the D600 is ahead.

        I can only see one minor one the 6D is ahead.

        I am with you. I’ve got a D800E and love it – but I think the FX market is hotting up nicely and here Nikon is streaking ahead.


        I have a wish-list that I believe Nikon should do something about. And it can largely be fixed with firmware upgrade. Like 2 stop bracketing (it limits at 1 stop). Saving RAW files when using HDR feature. Do something about the seriously bad “Banks” – at least the option to save them and”fix” them and have proper control over them – they are just hopeless at the moment and don’t know too people who use them.

        • Gabe
          November 28, 2012 at 11:20 pm

          But, what about the dust problem with the d600? that seems like a huge thing, if you ask me :/

          • Hoeras
            November 29, 2012 at 12:13 am

            Yeah, not good. Hopefully just a bad batch of sensors, it certainly should not have this problem.

          • Hoeras
            November 29, 2012 at 2:21 am

            It may actually be an oil problem from the mirror assembly that splashes onto the sensor? There are stories that some of the D7000 suffered from the same problem.

          • Willieg
            March 14, 2013 at 7:23 pm

            The so-called dust/oil problem is a minor thing that Canon fanboys keep resurrecting to sully the name of the D600 which blows the 6D out of the water. They keep saying you have to return it to the factory, you have to pay shipping, you have to wait weeks for it to come back. To that I say 3 words: sensor cleaning kit. if you don’t already have one you’re not a serious photographer. My sensor gets dirty. I clean it. 20 minutes later I’m shooting again. It’s not a “problem” or an ” issue”. It happens to every camera sooner or later. The D600 is the best camera in the new “entry level full-frame” category by a collossal margin. Get over it and move on.

  4. 4) Pascal
    September 18, 2012 at 1:13 am

    Great article but I don’t believe that a head to head comparison between the D600 and the 6D is a relevant comparison. A comparison like this is only relevant for people who are not Nikon or Canon customers. It is very unlikely that an existing Canon customer will buy the D600 and vise versa.
    I do like the fact that both camera giants are introducing FX cameras who come into the reach of a broader audience. And as a long time Nikon customer, I find the D600 very tempting. Nevertheless, I’m convinced that the 6D is a great camera too.
    I believe that both of these cameras should be weighed against the other camera models in the manufactures line up. For example: how does the D600 hold up against the D800 and a similar comparison for the Canon camera (I’m not familiar with the different Canon camera models).
    I’m looking forward to your D600 / D800 comparison once you guys get your hands on a D600.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 4.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 1:21 am

      We will have similar 6D comparisons with 5D II, 5D III and Sony SLT-A99. While it is important to compare within the same system to help someone decide which camera is better for them, it is as important to compare against direct rivals to see which manufacturer has succeeded in releasing a overall better product to the public. In this case, Canon brought out a great camera, but an outdated one even within its own system, the biggest mistake being omission of a 7D-similar AF system.

      Also, some photographers will choose one or the other system based on these models, while others might actually make a switch. If there were no cases of system swapping, there would be no need to compete in the market.

      All in all, cameras compete between systems with their most direct rivals. That is what makes manufacturers release better products.

    • 4.2) TR
      September 18, 2012 at 1:34 am

      Not sure I agree here, Pascal. Both cameras are meant to be an entry path into full frame. If you already own a D800, D4, 5D MIII etc. there is no reason to consider those bodies, unless perhaps as a backup system. Even people who own older full frame cameras might not want to upgrade – if you own the 5D MII the 6D is hardly compelling (unless you really require GPS etc.). There will still be some full frame owners who will buy these cameras, but they mostly seem to target people who consider moving to 35mm sensors. That means they are also likely to buy new glass – and if you do it is not so hard to switch systems. The fact that Canon launched this at exactly the same price as the Nikon camera – and announced this now when the Nikon starts shipping already can also be seen as an indication that they consider price crucial to stop people from going to Nikon – professionals and those heavily invested into a system would not care about hundred bucks more or less. People who start there system from scratch might.
      From that point of view such a direct comparison is useful. I also agree with Roman that on paper the 6D is much less attractive. For my use the GPS would be fantastic though, so even if the 6D does nothing else I hope it will drive Nikon to also include GPS in future models.
      It will be interesting to see how good the sensor is. Canon has really fallen behind Nikon here, but maybe they will surprise us with a new and exciting sensor (although the rest of the specs make me doubt it). A critical question will of course be the ergonomics. If a camera does not feel comfortable in my hands the quality of the image suffer much more than from a weaker sensor. From that point of view I look forward to trying both cameras, although it may be a while until the 6D will be available in shops, I fear.

      • 4.2.1) Pascal
        September 18, 2012 at 2:38 am

        I believe that potential buyers of both these cameras can be categorized in mainly three different categories: 1) current customers buying a backup camera, 2) current DX shooters moving up to FX and of course 3) new customers. No question that new customers will be interested in reviews like this.

        But I believe that the vast majority of the potential buyers of these cameras are in the first and second category. Most DX shooters moving to FX won’t change brands because they likely have equipment that will work on both DX and FX (some lenses, speedlights, etc). DX shooters who make the move are likely to be enthusiast photographers. These are the type of customers that tend to buy the more expensive gear anyway – so most of these people will already have some FX compatible lenses. Also, the experience one has with a particular brand is important and will also be a key factor in the decision.

        Anyone who makes the brand switch will have a very good reason to do so. The fact that a particular model has a GPS or wifi, or has a few pixels more or less is not a good reason.

        • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin Romanas Naryškin
          September 18, 2012 at 2:47 am

          In my opinion, you are mostly right, Pascal. However, I strongly believe that DX shooters wanting to move up to FX are still in a place where they can, and will think about, switch brand relatively painlessly.

          You’ve listed several reasons why one would choose to stay or switch brand. You are also very much right in saying these cameras are not good enough reason to make such a move, but you’ve missed one word – alone. These cameras are not enough of a reason alone to switch brands. But in conjunction with recent announcements, they may prove to be the last drop.

          Also, this comparison is interesting and has been made for competitive reasons. It was interesting to note how each manufacturer approached the exact same market segment, with Nikon offering a very sensible option for the price, and Canon – an outdated product, basically a reshaped 4 year old 5D II.

          • TR
            September 18, 2012 at 3:36 am

            Whoops, only saw your comment after I posted mine. I agree on the points you make. I still shoot DX but plan to switch this or next year. I have some FX lenses, but replacing what needs to be replaced will cost me between £2000-2500; replacing the remaining FX glass would add another £1K. Still a bit of money, but overall it would only add 1/5 to the cost – and if I sell these lenses for a decent price (and FX glass tends to keep its value well) there would almost be no cost — apart from the time of course.

            Now, looking at the current full frame line-up I cannot see much to tempt me away from Nikon. The 6D certainly won’t; the 5D MIII looks like a great camera but does not offer anything over the D800 that could make me switch. If I had bought into Canon I suspect I would have become attached to that system and stayed, but I would still have given the Nikon cameras a closer look.

        • TR
          September 18, 2012 at 3:28 am

          I don’t have any reliable statistics on how many photographers with crop sensor cameras have full frame lenses, or how many. My point is that for those who don’t or those who don’t have a large amount moving to full frame may also be an opportunity to switch systems – and for those people a comparison would be relevant. (I also agree with the other reasons Roman gives.)

          It may even be more relevant to Canon shooters – from your use of FX/DX I take it you use Nikon. The Canon crop sensor lenses, EF-S, cannot be mounted on the full frame mount. This means Canon user lose all EF-S lenses when moving up, whereas Nikon shooters can continue to use them. If you move from a 12MP sensor the D800 will even give you more resolution, whereas the D600 sort of matches it. Depending on which body you come from, using your DX lenses on FX will be an improvement, or should at least be fine until you can upgrade them over time. Now, I am not saying I foresee millions of Canon users switching system because of this, but depending on what you look for it may be an option.

          Anyway, I agree in principle that one feature alone is probably not a good reason to switch brand. Having said that, I spend hours geo-tagging my photos. Over a few years the use of GPS would probably pay the whole cost of switching systems. So what may just be one feature to you, may represent many hours of work to another.

          • Pascal
            September 18, 2012 at 3:53 am

            I don’t know what camera you are using TR, but if GPS is important to you then Nikon has some options:

            I have been looking at that as well. A GPS is not a deal breaker for me but it sure is a great feature that would indeed save a lot of tagging work. Besides that, it is easier to keep track of where a particular picture was taken when hiking or travelling.

            • TR
              September 18, 2012 at 4:05 am

              Thanks, Pascal. I have not systematically looked into this yet, partly because of a vain hope the new Nikon FX cameras might have this built in. I could be tempted to buy that unit (although £190 is a lot of money if you consider every smartphone has this integrated for much cheaper), however, I am not too keen on having the GPS in the hotshoe with the cable at the side, and this unit also seems to drain battery fast.
              What I would hope for is a built-in unit that has a good power savings mode, i.e. you could set it to only activate when you take a photo and then to go back to sleep soon after. I’d happily pay more for a camera that did that.

            • TR
              September 18, 2012 at 4:13 am

              Forgot to add: I use the D7000. In general I am very happy with it, but I am considering FX for several reasons. One is that the lenses I am most interested in make more sense on a 35mm sensor; I also would not mind a slightly larger body for better grip. Most importantly though I am looking for features that help me with low-light photography, and this is where larger viewfinder, better AF and better high ISO performance would come in handy. More resolution is a bonus for landscape and macro work.
              Even so, the D7000 is a great camera and there is no rush to upgrade; I will see how the D600 reviews, especially the AF module, and how the price develops. I suspect that the D800 will be better for me, despite lacking the U1/U2 modes and the need to buy a faster PC to process the files. At the current UK price point getting the D800 would be a no-brainer anyway as it only costs £250 more but I get the better AF and can continue to use some of my DX glass at about the D7000 resolution. Strangely this would make the move cheaper, at least until I replace all my glass.

            • Calibrator
              September 18, 2012 at 2:23 pm

              This is *really* a no-brainer for you:
              Macro & landscape all profit from the D800’s resolution. Only you can answer if you ever will do large prints, though…
              For this stuff (and for low-light work) you also don’t need to take a lot of images per second and the bigger body of the D800 may be a tad better for balancing heavy lenses (like the 14-24).

              However, apart from the ridiculously low UK price difference, the D800 has another big advantage if you are doing HDR (and many landscape photographers will sooner or later): You can do up to 9 automatically bracketed shots which will lead to better HDR images (bigger dynamic range) as the D600 is limited to three automatic bracket exposures like the D7000. (One can get more bracketing exposures on the cheaper bodies but only with manual assistance as Nikon intentionally crippled their firmware).

              Apart from being faster the D600 seems to have only one major advantage the D800 doesn’t have: The U1/U2 modes. Personally, I consider these very important, even essential for a “universal camera” and I use them often on my D7000.
              I can’t understand why Nikon didn’t include them on the D800 and D4 and would therefore *not* buy them but if you can live without these modes you probably should consider the D800.

              About GPS: Don’t buy the Nikon GPS unit! It’s practically the worst of them all (way too expensive for what it offers, long cable with a long plug, sucks on the camera battery, doesn’t keep the position when you switch the camera off etc.).
              Get a better one from Dawntech or Solmeta instead! The more simpler ones are drastically cheaper than the Nikon one and generally have less problems.
              If you are ready to spend a lot of money on the Nikon one then buy the Solmeta Geotagger Pro which not only has several additional features (a compass, an LCD with a horizontal and vertical level, a track logger) but also comes with its own battery so it’s not as heavy on the camera’s battery. I use it nearly all the time when I’m shooting outdoors and while it has a short cable it isn’t as problematic as you might think. In fact it has been a joy from day one is absolutely reliable. Sorry for the blatant advertising ;-) but as much as I love Nikon cameras don’t buy their GPS unit!

              • TR
                September 19, 2012 at 2:47 am

                Thank you, Calibrator! As I mentioned I have never before systematically looked into GPS, so I was aware that there are third party alternatives to Nikon, but not that they would be cheaper *and* supplied with their own battery. For my needs the Geotagger N2 seems be fine and from reviews it looks like you can get through a full day of shooting with it!

                In many ways I think the D800 would be the camera for me, especially for better AF, but also for the reasons you outline. I don’t print very much at all and never larger than 36×24, so from that point of view a D800 is not necessary. Improving IQ by downsampling is always welcome though, and for a while I could continue to use some of my DX lenses (which initially saves money) on the D800. The only real advantages of the D600 would be smaller file size (actually a disadvantages but means I would not have to buy a new PC), 2 SD slots (I only use SDHC so far) and the U1/U2, which are very useful indeed. Interestingly, the D800 has again come down in price in the UK, there is now less than £200 price difference. So unless when holding both in my hands I fall in love with the D600 ergonomics the D800 seems the right choice (and if I do fall in love with D600 ergonomics I’d wait a few months anyway, in case the first batch has any problems and for the price to drop).

                Anyway, thanks again for your comments, very much appreciated.

          • Abhijith
            September 19, 2012 at 5:28 am

            what you said is right technically. Ef-s lenses cannot be mounted on canon full frame bodies. And the people who complain about it are always the nikon users.
            The reality is that canon has only 9 EF-s lenses. JUST 9. And they expect even those users of their crop bodies to use high quality EF lenses. I don’t think there’s any need for them to make it possible for mounting those lenses on a full frame body.

            I strongly suggest that people who use cropped bodies of any make to use good lenses of the full frame kind from their manufacturers instead of spending that money to buy a full frame camera. The lense you use is going to matter a lot more on full frame cameras than it would on a crop sensor.

            And, someone who has good idea on photography (not a technophile i mean) will know that the lens matters a lot more than the camera body. The camera body just need to give you noise free pics at reasonable ISOs

            • TR
              September 19, 2012 at 10:22 am

              Yes, lenses are important. I don’t think they are always more important than the camera (ergonomics to me rate fairly high; some things you cannot do with some AF systems), but often they are, and solid lenses are likely to be with you for a long time too. As I don’t shoot Canon I have no reason to complain about anything they do though, apart from that I want them to compete with Nikon so that Nikon continue to make good cameras for my needs. The only point I wanted to make is that for the Canon photographers who have invested in EF-S lenses there would not be much additional cost when switching to Nikon. Not say they would (although some might be tempted by DxoMark results, unless the 6D scores equally high of course), it just seemed to me this is the one system migration where the risk of losing users is highest.

            • Abhijith
              September 20, 2012 at 5:46 am

              @TR you got a big point there. I want them to compete with each other because we’d end up getting better products. But that seems not to be happenig right now. looks like nikon is on the way to cams with big specifications and canon is trying to make best image quality with the least specifications. Both are going in different directions. Let’s say, that too will help us better choose what we need from their offerings.

              I never cared anything for the DxoMark ratings. It’s a photographer who should rate the lenses and cameras. Not some Mathematician or scientist who’s gonna tell us the statistics of that.

              And concerning EF-s lenses, it’s not worth for the manufacturer to make compromises just for 9 lenses of the total of hundreds. But it happens to be opposite for nikon.

              As i have said before, Canon expects even it’s lower level costumers to use EF lenses and not EF-S. And nikon belives that even the user of their flagship camera will use DX lens on it.

    • 4.3) flap
      September 18, 2012 at 12:20 pm

      Disagree with you there Pascal. Users of Canon crop sensor cameras are going to need t buy full frame EF lenses so it’s perfectly feasible for them to switch to Nikon (for the ones that haven’t bought EF lenses exclusively). Given the consumer sector these cameras are aimed at, paper specs are very important for the commercial success of the camera.

      When I was a student working in a camera store you wouldn’t believe the amount of people that would come in and snigger that their low end SLR or compact had more MP than a D3 for 10% of the price.

      On the other hand it’s easier for a DX user to switch to FX given the compatibility of lenses.

  5. September 18, 2012 at 2:19 am

    Interesting… I don’t see you pointing out the difference is max flash sync speed, which could be a deal breaker for a lot of folks.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 5.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 2:21 am

      There isn’t a very big difference between D600’s 1/200s and 6D’s 1/180s – both are nothing to be proud of.

  6. 6) Oded Shopen
    September 18, 2012 at 4:39 am

    I think the 6D will sell better than the D600, solely due to the “consumer” features of having wifi and GPS built in. These are not consumer features. They should have been standard on all dSLRS. years ago. It opens up a world of options for users. Not just to share on Facebook or twitter- canon will also provide an app to let you use a wireless shutter release with instant review of the results. Think how amazing it will be to release the shutter from your iPad and see the result on the big screen.

    For the d800 at least, Nikon has a rather expensive gps unit which hogs the hot shoe (so no flash mount for you) and an option of a huge 1000$ accessory for wifi. Seriously? The 60$ dongle sold for the 3200 couldn’t be supported on the d800?

    I love Nikon and love my d800e, but honestly, sometimes they are just milking the cow for no reason (think 600$ for a battery grip).

  7. September 18, 2012 at 6:38 am

    It’s D600 is predominant. But also attractive lightness of 6D

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 7.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 8:03 am

      Despite what Canon claims regarding the size and weight of 6D, D600 actually weighs less and is of extremely similar dimensions.

  8. 8) FrancoisR
    September 18, 2012 at 6:47 am

    Thank you Roman for a great Mansurovs article again, very impressive and getting better all the time!!!

    I wonder if the ISO war between these two will be similar to the 5DIII and D800. On paper the 60D appears superior in that respect and sensitivity to light is full frame’s best asset. If I had to consider one or the other body only, I might go for the D600. But Nikon’s Achiles heel is still their lenses. Not that they are of lesser quality (24-70G is superb), It’s just that Canon has a better array (new and used) and lenses are far more important in my opinion than bodies in decision making (which get obselete within a couple of years). Good lenses are utilsed for decades. For instance I just bought a used 300mm L F4 IS which is 10 years old (yes stabilised) and I’m still waiting for Nikon’s 300mm F4 VR (which I will buy for sure lloll). “L” lenses are Canon’s best assest and they simply make my life easier…

    And just because of that more 60D bodies will be sold (IMHO).

    • 8.1) FrancoisR
      September 18, 2012 at 7:08 am

      Oops meant to say 6D lloll…

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 8.2) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 8:06 am

      We are yet to see ISO performance of both cameras, Francois – we will have them thoroughly compared as soon as possible. As for lenses, Nikon has been working hard in this department, updating fast primes (50mm f/1.8G, 85mm f/1.4G/1.8G, the fast 24mm and 35mm lenses, and so on). I’m sure time will come for consumer telephoto options, too. The current AF-S 300mm f/4 is a swell lens and only lacks stabilization in comparison. It’s bound to come sooner or later.

  9. 9) LSE
    September 18, 2012 at 6:55 am

    you forgot to mention that the 6D lacks a headphone output whereas the D600 does not.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 9.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 8:07 am

      I’ve forgot to mention more things than that, LSE, having decided to focus on the more important ones instead.

  10. 10) David B
    September 18, 2012 at 7:30 am

    Two points re: AF…. on paper Roman is correct. However, lets wait to see how they perform in real life, and not in landscape photography, but in low light, lets say, wedding shooting style photography. I know I shot D800 in low light and I am shooting 5DM3 in low light and the AF speed and accuracy difference is striking (to me).

    Second point: lets not forget that the strength of the system is really in the glass….bodies come and go, but the glass remains constant. Canon L glass is very strong, 70-200 F/2.8 IS II is the best in industry according to universally all the reviews, Canon’s new 24-70L II, is, according to first reviews is phenomenal, and better than anything in that range (I am awaiting Nasim’s review of the new 24-70L II). That coupled with Canons 35L, 50L, and 85L II…etc… Nikon has some strong contenders in 24 1.4 and 14-24 1.4 as well, etc.

    So I hope when people compare the two cameras, and consider where to go, they evaluate the system and not just an individual body.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 10.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 12:34 am

      Hello, David, thank you for your thoughts!

      I’m sure 6D AF will be sufficient for most needs. I also think, but that’s my personal opinion, that Nikon AF system will be somewhat superior. Again, we will see for sure once we’ve reviewed both – I don’t want to make any hasty assumptions, and would actually love Canon to have given 6D a superb AF system.

      As for lenses, this is where Nikon and Canon leapfrog each other. Before 24-70 MkII, Nikon’s 24-70 f/2.8 was seen as phenomenal and better than Canon counterpart by most. Same with 70-200 f/2.8’s – the only real downside, and, note, not for everyone, is focus breathing of the Nikkor 70-200 f/2.8 VR II – mind you, it’s sharp as razor. Nikon’s 85mm lenses are very much comparable to those of Canon, as are 24 and 35 fast primes.

      And, frankly, I don’t care about none of these points. We got too technical here at Mansurovs lately due to all the announcements. Both systems are very good, I could work just as well with either, it just so happens that I chose Nikon when given a choice. That’s all.

      I can’t wait to get back to actual photography articles !

    • 10.2) Panupat
      December 6, 2012 at 12:26 am

      And which one is better? The AF?

  11. September 18, 2012 at 7:43 am

    I have a Nikon D7000 and i have no plan to replace it any time soon…! it sure full fills my needs…!

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 11.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 12:34 am

      Mohamed, I’m glad you know what you need!

  12. 12) MarkL
    September 18, 2012 at 8:05 am

    The reality is, FF sensors are not going to go down in price; at least not any time soon. With low yields and huge waste from a single silicon wafer, companies will keep churning out smaller sensors — that’s their bread and butter.

    • 12.1) David B
      September 18, 2012 at 8:13 am

      and the smaller sensors are getting better and better. Enjoying my Olympus OM-D very much. And my Sony RX100 is not too shabby either (1 inch sensor)…

      • 12.1.1) MarkL
        September 18, 2012 at 8:21 am

        They are but that doesn’t make FF sensor any less desirable and that market segment is willing to pay $$$. explains everything. The rest is pure economics.

        • Calibrator
          September 18, 2012 at 2:30 pm

          This simplified illustration actually doesn’t explain everything as the “waste area” is often filled with smaller sensors. AFAIK nobody wastes wafer space anymore.

          • MarkL
            September 18, 2012 at 2:59 pm

            AFAIK the waste is huge and they don’ix and match sensor. Moreover, a certain percentage of sensors come out defective, so after writing them off the yield rates are even lower. Wafers are not that expensive anyway.

            FF prices aren’t looking any much better down the road.

      • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 12.1.2) Romanas Naryškin
        September 18, 2012 at 8:27 am

        FF sensors are just as well getting better and better, so the gap remains.

  13. 13) Steven P
    September 18, 2012 at 8:34 am

    I would have hoped that in both cases the price came in around the $1,800 mark rather than in the $2,000+. Street price will differ, but even recently you could get a D700 for around $2,200.
    The 6D offers an interesting choice for Canon photographers. The Canon EFS lenses are not compatible with their fullframe body leaving the traditional Canon ASPC buyer the option of moving to Nikon. Our traditional investment stake is in the lenses and Canon has not made that an option, unless the 6D has addressed that issue in some manner.
    Its the wave of the future as mirrorless cameras take more control over the lower-price marketplace, the traditional DSLR will move steadily fullframe.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 13.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 12:36 am

      A very likely assumption, Steven, but we are yet to see how it all goes. :)

  14. 14) Randall
    September 18, 2012 at 8:59 am

    Local camera shop has them in stock. So tempting. If the dang autofocus area was larger I would have one in hand already. I hear focus and recompose is not an ideal solution.

    Roman…. What’s your thoughts on this AF area? Can’t you drive to best buy and grab one for a quick review. ;)

    I should just send the wife over to grab one. I guess I could always eBay it If I don’t love it.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 14.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 9:01 am

      I’d buy one if I could, Randall ;)

      By the way, during my weddings, I very often use the focus-recompose technique even with my D700 and its 51-poit AF.

      • 14.1.1) Randall
        September 18, 2012 at 9:10 am

        So your saying it’s a non-issue? I’m gonna get It. :) Will be in hand shortly. Fingers crossed its good.

        • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin Romanas Naryškin
          September 18, 2012 at 9:12 am

          Which one are you talking about, Randall, the 6D, or the D600? :) They are both great cameras. It’s just that, if you compare spec-to-spec, D600 is better technically, but that doesn’t make 6D any worse of a camera.

          • Randall
            September 18, 2012 at 9:27 am

            D600. Camera shop just called and said if I wanted one to come now. I love doing portraits with my 85 1.4g in my d5100 but I don’t think much about the autofocus it just works. This camera has a smaller area do I was worried about the Dof issue. I’m still learning but It sounds like technique can over come these issues.

            • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin Romanas Naryškin
              September 18, 2012 at 9:30 am

              D600 should have an extremely reliable AF system, better than that of D5100. At first I too needed getting used to the smaller area covered in the viewfinder, but it has never been a problem. You need to learn your camera either way, Randall, to be able to use it without feeling constrained. It’s part of being a professional – the gear is usually better than you are.

          • Randall
            September 18, 2012 at 9:34 am

            Thanks Roman you make me feel better. Whatever dont kill me will make me a better photographer. Sent wifey over to pick it up. Let’s pray she don’t have the battery drained by the time I get off work!!!

            • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin Romanas Naryškin
              September 18, 2012 at 9:36 am

              I would very much like to read your thoughts on it as soon as you have anything to say, Randall. :)

            • Randall
              September 18, 2012 at 9:48 am

              Certainly. Gonna take some shots after work. I’ll let you know how it goes. Maybe throw a couple on Flickr.

    • 14.2) MarkL
      September 18, 2012 at 9:04 am

      You’re right. Focus & recompose is not ideal in many situations. Use it with caution:

      • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 14.2.1) Romanas Naryškin
        September 18, 2012 at 9:08 am

        It takes both skill and caution, Mark. I constantly shoot at f/1.4 with either my 50mm or 85mm lens. I’ve learned to use focus-recompose (it involves subtle body movement) and now find it much quicker and more accurate in about 60% of situations. As always, using both methods where they fit best is most rewarding in terms of accurately focused photographs.

  15. 15) Kadidal
    September 18, 2012 at 9:11 am

    The Nikon-Canon wars do seem to be pretty one-sided right now, and my sense is that this mostly comes down to sensors — the Sony sensors that Nikon is using are way better than Canon’s, as one might expect given Sony’s huge resources compared to either Nikon or Canon. (And there are already a few postings — Claff, TechRadar — showing the D600’s sensor testing very close to the D800’s.) I’m very curious about the economics of the arrangement between Sony and Nikon — Sony is a competitor in the camera business, after all. Why sell the best part of their cameras to Nikon?

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 15.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 9:24 am

      Some of the sensors are designed by Nikon themselves, Kadidal. I’m not sure which ones in particular, though, but there’s a list somewhere.

      Also, the reason why Sony sells sensors to Nikon is simple – otherwise, they would not survive as a full-frame camera manufacturer.

    • 15.2) David B
      September 18, 2012 at 4:46 pm

      Kadidal, the wars don’t just come down to sensors. You need to factor in the lens selection. Why does everyone just concentrate on bodies, which many people replace every couple of years anyway.

      • 15.2.1) Kadidal
        September 18, 2012 at 7:56 pm

        Well, sure, but Nikon seems to have the upper hand in the lens department. Narrowly over Canon, hugely over Sony/Minolta. So again, the question, rephrased: I wonder at what point Sony will be large enough as a camera maker to have the economic incentive to stop selling Nikon sensors. At that point I think those of us who have invested in Nikon lenses will no longer be so confident that we’ve chosen the right brand between Canon (which develops its own sensors, i take it, and has 3-4x the market cap of Nikon) and Nikon. Hopefully it never comes to pass.

        Roman, I suspect (and so do many others) that Nikon adds little tweaks to the sensors Sony makes, and occasionally gets their brand name etched onto the chip — which gives that Chipworks site an occasional story, but I suspect doesn’t amount to much because (as a giant company with much more R&D money to invest) basically Sony is doing the heavy lifting in the design department. On that theory, most of the performance differences we see in practice between Sony sensors and the “Nikon”-branded variants are from different NR and other software algorithms that Nikon seems to really do a nice job with.

        Who knows, maybe that is wrong and it really is more of a symbiosis — I believe there were even rumors of Sony trying to buy Nikon before the Minolta acquisition. It’s all very interesting to speculate about from the outside… Anyway, I’m looking forward to my D600 arriving next week, and finally putting to use the 50 1.4 and 20 2.8 primes I picked up used over the last year while waiting for it to come out!

        • David B
          September 18, 2012 at 8:23 pm

          “Nikon has upper hand in lens department” I don’t want to start Brand Wars, but have you been living under the rock???? Have you checked out reviews of Canon’s 70-200 F/2.8 IS II, on dpreview and other places, universally stating it is the best across brands? How about first reviews of 24-70L II??? The reviews are stellar and suggest that it is so much better than all the other 24-70, it is not even close. Nikon has some strong lenses, like 14-24, and their newer primes are good for landscapers, but have slow AF mechanism (AF-S SWF)… You own one of these newer zooms in 50 1.4 AF-S. I took my D800 with 50 1.4 AF-S to shoot my child’s delivery and lost a lot of precious shots due to damn slow AF of that combo.

          • Mister Pogi
            September 19, 2012 at 12:05 am

            You’re right David the 50mm 1.4G is slow at focusing. This is what’s making me hesitate getting Nikon primes. I tested the 85 1.4G and it felt slow… even the Sigma 85 1.4 I tested felt slightly faster.

            I have to disagree though with your statement “The reviews are stellar and suggest that it is so much better than all the other 24-70, it is not even close.” If it was that much better then many Canon users wouldn’t be complaining about the increase in price.

            • David B
              September 19, 2012 at 12:27 am

              The increase in price sucks, I know. But the reviews are phenomenal. The review on lensrentals by Roger Cicala (and he tests multiple copies) show sharpness that is beyond belief. It is supposedly sharper at 70mm than 70-200 F/2.8!!!! Some unreal numbers we are talking about. Cicala (who is highly respected, dpreview copy his articles) says that in this case, that lens is one of the few that actually is worth its $2300 price

          • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin Romanas Naryškin
            September 19, 2012 at 12:39 am

            David, I use my 50mm f/1.4G AF-S at every single wedding I attend, and take around 80% of the shots with it. The AF is not a problem most of the time )although I’m not saying I wouldn’t want it to be faster).

    • 15.3) Anson R
      September 20, 2012 at 1:49 pm

      Yes, even Hasselblad today used SONY SENSOR, see “Hasselblad LUNAR”.

  16. September 18, 2012 at 9:56 am

    May be some important points were missed here. The 6D’s bigger pixels are likely to produce cleaner images at all ISO settings. ISO range is also much higher. But a full frame DSLR should have gone upto 150,000 shutter actuations. And both of them are at fault to limit the shutter speed at 1/4000 sec – this is unacceptable.

    However, users of both the camps will be happy with these 2 DSLRs as the D800 and 5D Mark III did not stire up as much hype as expected due to many reasons. However, none of them packs any magic that can lure away users.

  17. September 18, 2012 at 11:37 am

    The 6D has a maximum shutter speed of 1/8000 seconds, not 1/4000.

  18. 18) rmtjin
    September 18, 2012 at 1:37 pm

    I’m curious as to why Canon chose not to include a popup flash if this is their consumer/amateur camera.
    Even if you don’t plan to use it as simple fill, a commander type mode for remote flashes would have been nice to have.
    Also, even without the flash housing, why can’t they get a 100% viewfinder?

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 18.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 18, 2012 at 1:39 pm

      It could be they used the viewfinder of the 5D II.

      I would actually prefer not to have a pop-up flash on my D700. I don’t use commander mode that much, and if i had to without having the flash, I’d buy a cheap radio trigger. But having a all-magnesium construction with better sealing is an advantage I’d prefer.

  19. 19) Derek
    September 18, 2012 at 4:01 pm

    Appreciate the frank initial assessment and will be very interested to see a side-by-side test of the D600 & 6D.

    Still, one thing swaying me toward the Canon is the availability of the f4 24-105 mm lens, which seems (to me at least, and I’m a novice…) better than the Nikon lens on offer, which if I recall correctly is a 24-85 mm lens that was recently released.

    Also, the novice in me asks, in practice will there be a big difference between the 39 point AF system of the D600 and the 11 point system in the 6D?

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 19.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 12:44 am

      We are yet to see, Derek, how good Canon’s 11 point system is. I’d always prefer to have more points, but if 6D is accurate and reliable, I’m pretty sure I could live with it, easily.

      As for the lens choice, Nikon offers a more budget -oriented 24-85 kit zoom, while Canon supplies its 6d with a much better lens in comparison, the 24-105 f/4 L (and it only adds about $800 to the price, which is very cheap). However, Nikon does have a great 24-120 f/4 VR lens on offer, even if it’s more expensive than Canon counterpart.

  20. 20) Radall
    September 18, 2012 at 4:39 pm

    I GOT MINE!!!


    So I have been using the D600 camera for a few hours now and I am thrilled with it. Here is my amateur review. Right now I only have primes to shoot with (nikkor 28 1.8g, 50 1.8g, and 85 1.4g). Obviously coming from a crop body these lenses perform much different. My 85 feels like a whole different lens and thats for the better. The camera itself is heavy but not too bad. Its definately right between a d700 and d7000. The body feels solid and well built. It just feels expensive. The autofocus so far has been great. My wife got to play with it before me and she’s like it focuses so fast. Now mind you she has never used a pro body but I do feel like the focus is good and it seems to work well. I do think people will complain about the focus points not filling more of the frame but I think all cameras have some limitations in this area so technique will be important. But if your just doing point and shoot like my wife most of her shots fall in this area anyways. So far the image quality seems great. The only con right now is it was very expensive (over $2200 with tax). I think once this camera comes down in price (which it will because the dealer had a TON of them) it will become a very very good deal and a popular full frame body. Overall I am glad I went with this body over the d800. I think 24mp is a good sweet spot for full frame. Also the size of the camera is wonderful. I think it will blend in on the street just a tiny bit more especially with my 50mm lens on it. I did however skip the kit lens and picked up a 28-300mm on ebay for $800. I hope that was the right choice for a zoom. I can’t see walking around with a 24-70mm on the front of this. My 85mm already looks huge. I think if I don’t like it I will sell it and get a 24-120 f4. Anyways thats my impression so far. Cant wait for your reviews!!!!1

    • 20.1) David B
      September 18, 2012 at 4:48 pm

      It is nice that you are excited about the af on D600. May I ask you which camera are you upgrading/downgrading from? Have you tried to use your camera in low light conditions already? Like very low light??? How is the focusing???

      • 20.1.1) Radall
        September 18, 2012 at 7:03 pm

        I have a d5100 now but I have owned a d700 and a 5d mark II. I sold them cause I thought they were getting long in the tooth and due for replacement. Also Im still learning and I wanted a simpler camera. ;) I think I have finally settled on Nikon. I was gonna get another d700 but I thought I would give this camera a try first.

        Please note I’m such an amateur. This is in no way scientific. But I can tell you it was pretty dark in the kitchen with lights on in the other room.

        Judge them for yourself. I shot these with a tripod and the same lens (nikon 50mm 1.8g). Obviously with it being so dark so the focus may be a little different in each shot as I didn’t try very hard. But if you look at what is in focus you can see differences. The color of the watermelon was very dark green in real life and it looks more normal on the d600 and way lighter on the d5100. Again Nasim will give us the scientific breakdown. I shot one shot of each in auto and one of each camera in aperture priority wide open. Its funny cause in auto mode the d600 chose ISO 1600 and the D5100 chose ISO 3200. Im sure my method was flawed though.

        They kinda look the same to my amateur eyes with the d600 being a little better. I still can’t understand why the camera both cameras pick a higher ISO when in aperture priority mode then when in auto because they were wide open in both modes but the shutter speed and other things probably come into play. All my photos seem to look better in auto. That shows you how much of an amateur I am. ;) I think thats why Nikon made this camera to show people like me that I don’t know what the F$%# I am doing and I should probably just get a point and shoot. LOL!!!

        Hope I figure out what I am doing soon before I end up with a G14.

        • Radall
          September 18, 2012 at 7:13 pm

          Oops I think its a G15 now. Whatever the hell they want to call it. ;)

        • David B
          September 18, 2012 at 8:16 pm

          Thank you so much for providing actual samples, it is very useful!!!!! Looks very clean, although it would be even nicer if you uploaded these in full 24MP, instead of downscaling it to 4MP size!!!! Don’t worry about WB. You said the kitchen was very dark. Did you use AF Assist light or no AF Assist light at all for these?

          • Randall
            September 18, 2012 at 8:54 pm

            Yes AF assist came on for the d600. I don’t remember if It came on for the d5100. I may have had it shut off. I’m sure it was off cause initially I had to turn another lamp on in the other room to get focus. Sorry I was in a hurry and wasn’t thinking. I’m sure Nasim will put it through all the paces for us. ;)

            • jukekey
              September 19, 2012 at 12:05 pm

              was the shutter speed same?

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 20.2) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 12:47 am

      Thanks, Randall! I’m glad you liked it. Now, don’t waste any more time doing test shots. Take it into the field, you’ll have much more fun.

      • 20.2.1) Randall
        September 19, 2012 at 6:54 am

        :( But I want to be like to be like you guys. ;) Just let me finish up my review then… as Nasim would say “Clearly the D600 is cleaner at high ISO”. Clearly it is the winner. LOL :)

        Now off to shoot…!

  21. 21) EnPassant
    September 18, 2012 at 6:50 pm

    As a Nikon user and D600 being the smaller full-frame camera I have been waiting for and anticipated years before it was released the choice is easy, especially as D600 clearly have the overall better specifications.
    Hovever a Canon user with several full-frame lenses, maybe from the days of film, propably wouldn’t think twice about the 6D.

    Both cameras are very capable and for many photographers the advantages the other camera may have doesn’t matter that much.
    However one thing 6D has going for it is the possibility to change the focus screen to another that is easier to focus manually with. Combined with the short registration distance and wide EF-mount 6D will be the first choice for all who want to adapt old manual lenses on a full-frame camera.

  22. 22) Biansan
    September 19, 2012 at 4:57 am

    Just one thing: on the body-only weight, Canon 6D is 24.0 oz. (680g), according to the website listed in your article, while Nikon D600 is 760g. In fact from my point of view that’s one of the only advantages 6D has as compared to D600. I’m a D90 user and have been following D600 news for a while and will definitely buy one. Also thanks very much for the great articles on your website. I’ve really learnt a lot from them.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 22.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 5:00 am

      Thank you for your kind words, Biansan. :)

      I must correct you, however. D600 weighs that much with a battery (versus 6D’s 770g with a battery). I can’t say how much D600 weighs without one.

      • 22.1.1) Biansan
        September 19, 2012 at 6:30 am

        Well, it’d be best if D600 could weight 760g with a battery, but the official website says “Approx. Weight: 26.8 oz. (760g) camera body only”. So it’s 760g (D600 without battery) vs. 660g (6D without battery). Check it out here:

        In fact I thought that most of the Canon’s DSLRs seem to be lighter than those competing ones from Nikon, such as EOS 7D vs D300s and 5D Mark iii vs D800.

        • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin Romanas Naryškin
          September 19, 2012 at 6:40 am

          Biansan, you are right. I really did think the weight was with a battery. Thanks for clearing that up!

          • Biansan
            September 19, 2012 at 10:43 am

            thanks for all these good articles!

  23. 23) FrancoisR
    September 19, 2012 at 6:24 am

    I’m just back from a trip to Colombia. We took 105GB of pictures with D800 and 5D mkII and my number one camera is still the old Canon. IMHO as a travel system it beats the D800, a high resolution blurred image is still worthless at the end. Of course the microscope capabilities of the D800 are great on a still subject. But on the Antioquia bumby roads the “inferior” 11 point focus on the Canon never missed a beat using a MK 1 24-70 while the D800 was ok only with the 24-70G and 24D. The AFS on Nikon is SLOW with the lenses I own (I dont consider the heavy VRII 70-200 a travel lens lloll but my 70-200 IS f4 is) and most of the time the scene was gone before the camera was ready. The colors and contrast on the Canon are better and more pleasant before processing. I have been using Nikon for years but 2 years ago I ordered a 5D out of frustration (waiting for pixel count lloll). It took me a year to get used to it and my next body will be a 5D mkxx, not a III cause the II still does the job great. I got an 1800.00$ Zeiss 21mm Distagon with the 5D for movies but it stays in the box (not because of the manual focus but the colors and constrast are not there). I wish I could get my money back but I will keep my L lenses. I love my D800, the D600 and 6D are fine too but it’s the glass for what I DO that counts. Also for the ones still using DX bodies my advice would be to buy only FF lenses. The switch will be only easier when time comes. I started getting rid of DX lenses for my D300 5 years ago and going to FF was painless.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 23.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 6:36 am

      hello again, Francois!

      While I can’t speak for D800 and AF-S 24-70mm myself – I hate zooms and can’t afford a D800 just yet – I know for sure D800 has one of the best AF systems in any DSLR, going on par with the most expensive, such as D4 and 1DX and 5D MkIII. Another thing I know for sure is that 24-70mm AF-S focuses instantaniously (it shold be even faster than my 17-55 DX, which I use very rarely, but when I do, it never fails me). I’m not sure why you had such a huge amount of unfocused images, and I don’t mean to offend you, but it is somewhat likely it’s not the gear – maybe you didn’t get to use it enough and get familiar with it. :)

      Regardless, I’m glad you know what you need and don’t just go on about buying the best gear (according to someone else). Good luck!

    • 23.2) David B
      September 19, 2012 at 7:29 am

      By doing a Canon to Nikon comparison at the top of the post, Roman knew he was bound to get a lot of :Canon vs Nikon: posts like these:)

      Francois, I am not surprised by your results. I shoot dual-system (actually, triple, if you count my Olympus OM-D (Sony NEX before)) I bet if you had D700 instead, you would have had better luck and more in focus images. D800, which I owned but sold because I was disappointed with its use for my purposes, requires very precise techniques to get the best shot and often requires setting up etc, things you simply don’t want to do while traveling. D700 on the other hand, even a child could use I think, I travelled with it everywhere, and it felt like it was impossible to take a bad shot, it just did it perfectly, if you did not mind to be limited by 12MP. That is because you could be sloppy and the camera still pulled through easily. Even if you did not own any VR lenses.

      D7000 was the first wake up call for me, when I took it to Europe on vacation in 2010. That 16MP on a smaller sensor required much better techniques, and as a result I got a larger amount of blurred images as it compares to D700. D800 is even more demanding in that regard. And if you are shooting multisystem, or several cameras at the same time, it is easily apparent, as you grab one camera and everything is easy, while you grab another camera, and it gets frustrating. People with just one camera don’t see it as apparently since they don’t have instant comparison.

      By the way, speaking of AF System comparison, in my case, when I got my first DSLR with 51-point-system, NIkon D300 a while back, that seemed like an incredibly fast AF system from another universe (coming from Canon 40D). I thought it was the best thing since sliced bread. However, time went by, and Nikon kept putting the same system in their top camera, claiming slight adjustments (which I personally did not see). As a result, after shooting Canon 5D Mark III for several months, I pick up my Nikon D300 these days and that AF system feels like from a previous century, so slow and sluggish. On the other hand, have I never compared the two, I would not have had that problem.

      Finally, to go travel with D800 and 5DM2 and both with 24-70 lenses? That is soooo heavy to travel. If I am going on vacation to travel these days, I will take my m43 gear, small and light…

      • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 23.2.1) Romanas Naryškin
        September 19, 2012 at 7:39 am

        Actually, David, I am very glad that most Canon vs nikon discussions have been very constructive and polite :)

  24. 24) FrancoisR
    September 19, 2012 at 6:57 am

    Ah ah ah, I might be a bad Nikon shotter but my batting average is not bad on the 5D ;)…

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 24.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 6:59 am

      I’m not saying you’re bad, Francois, don’t get me wrong :)) In the end, what matters most is that you use a camera that just gets out of your way and lets you do your thing, that’s important.

    • 24.2) David B
      September 19, 2012 at 8:04 am

      FrancoisR, you are not the only one who talks about D800’s AF sluggishness…. Here is the first review of D600 by Chris Niccholls from the Camera Store, whose video reviews I generally enjoy… Chris talks about D800 AF issues in the middle of his review (but in a very quiet voice)

      • 24.2.1) FrancoisR
        September 19, 2012 at 8:44 am

        This thread is just like “Nikon support” of the early summer. Another can of worms lloll. But what is great about this site, it says:
        “Speak your mind”

        thank you Mansurovs :D

  25. 25) Kadidal
    September 19, 2012 at 9:04 am

    DxO Mark results are out, score equals the D800 at 94, with better low light performance:

    Amazing, the strides we’ve seen in sensor technology over the last decade. In two years these will look like quaint numbers, one hopes! “We all live in the best of all possible worlds…”

    • 25.1) David B
      September 19, 2012 at 11:50 am

      I am surprised that D600’s low light score per DXO is not much higher than D800. DXO /normalizes/ all sensors, normalizes meaning it downscales everything to 8MP and then measures. I’d think that D600 would score much higher than D800 in low light score…… I guess it is a testament to how good the sensor on D800 is. The other scores are pretty much expected. Of course DXO tests are just tests. Nevertheelss, I am sure that D600 is a fantastic camera and if one does not need 36MP of D800, could be the best overall Nikon’s camera to date in terms of price/performance

  26. 26) Kadidal
    September 19, 2012 at 9:25 am

    Sorry, one point lower than D800 overall — which rated a 95.

  27. 27) Anson R
    September 19, 2012 at 11:14 am

    The answer is easy: the Nikon D600 is MUCH better than the Canon 6D. This time, year 2012, Nikon has been very successful: D3200, D600, D800 and D4: Nikon beats Canon 4(four) to 0(zero). I have the impression that Nikon is regaining the place of QUEEN of photography. And I am not speaking of the sales, because not everyone who sells more is always right. In fact, today we humans, sell a lot of shit: pornography, violence, lies, stereotypes, hate, drugs, weapons. These trifles are sold very well in the world. But I speak of quality, of innovation, of corporate design of corporate identity, of the seriousness of the company. Nikon is innovation, high quality, technology, vision, evolution, revolution, warranty, a signature like that of a great artist, a signature like that of a great poet or writer. These four THOROUGHBREDS, D3200, D600, D800 and D4, are the beginning of a great new era. The digital photography until now has walked uphill. But now the technology is so advanced, that we can say: now the digital technology walk downhill. D3200, D600, D800 and D4 are Four masterpieces. Thank you, Nikon!

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 27.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 19, 2012 at 11:37 am

      Thank you, Anson, for such an expressive opinion. :)

      That’s a little bit extreme, I would say. Being a Nikon shooter, I would just as gladly use Canon 5D Mk III or the 1DX (though I find it and D4 too big and heavy for my use most of the time) instead of D800 or D4, because in the end, I’m a photographer, not a tech-geek, and I find all these cameras just as capable, with their own strengths and weaknesses.. As long as the gear I use gets out of my way and doesn’t work against me, I’m all set and happy to do what I love – photograph.

      Still, I’m glad you’re so enthusiastic about latest Nikon releases. Quite a few people in here would disagree with such an extreme, somewhat fanboy-ish opinion, I’m afraid. Don’t take it offensively.

      • 27.1.1) Anson R
        September 23, 2012 at 4:19 pm

        Dear Roman, I am not a fan-boy. I used until yesterday CANON(5d), by pure coincidence. The 5D has a horrible autofocus. I switched to Nikon because I do not like at all the marketing strategy of Canon. Paradox of paradoxes was the 5Dmk3 to convince me to leave Canon: the 5Dmk3 is just an update of an autofocus. And yes, I’m a lover of technology. The digital photography is technology. At the end, a detail of the photo is a PIXEL of the photo. I might boast of being an artist, a poet of photography. But digital photography is now possible thanks to technology. The technology itself is already poetry. The technology itself is already photography: the evolved human being, contemporary, modern, the human being to be photographed. The human being to be photographed while building the camera which will take a photo of himself. Yes Nikon today is better than Canon. I’m sorry but it is not a quote from a FAN-BOY. It ‘a phrase of a photographer. I’m not afraid to say it. I am not a diplomat. I’m not sentimental. Yes Nikon today is better than Canon, and of course the D600 is MUCH better than the 6D. Yes I know, the sensor is from Sony. So what? So, cheers to Sony!

        • David B
          September 23, 2012 at 4:47 pm

          5D may have a terrible autofocus. But you need to try 5DM3. it is not just an update in AF. It is the best AF in industry currently (in my opinion after owning Nikons between D300 and D800 (plus D7000) (I owned them all except D3 series) and Canons (all except 1 Series). There are other features that may be valuable. For me the quiet shutter of 5DM3 is priceless, as I take pictures of my 4-month-old baby while sleeping and don’t wake him up. Have you heard ‘quiet’ shutter of D800? It is a joke. My baby cried when he heard it.

          • Anson R
            September 25, 2012 at 1:40 pm

            You still do not UNDERSTAND what I’m talking about. Why I schould talk GOOD about Canon? Why Canon has needed three generation (5D, 5Dmk2 and 5Dmk3) to put on that “machine” an excellent autofocus? To see a good autofocus on Canon 6D, we have to wait for the 6Dmk3? Not only the autofocus of the 5D, but the whole strategy of Canon………SUCKS. Canon had already its possibilities with me. He could sell me a good autofocus on the 5D (which cost a lot of money), instead sold me a crap autofocus. Canon could make peace with me, putting one in the 5Dmk2 a decent autofocus. But even the autofocus 5Dmk2 sucks. Now the 5Dmk3? Why should I wait for THREE CANON CAMERA-GENERATIONS to have an autofocus DECENT? The 5Dmk3 in reality it is not an update of the 5DMK2, but it is only the update of THE AUTOFOCUS. JUst an autofocus and costs 3000 euro. They should not call it: 5Dmk3, but they should call it: “autofocusMK3″​​. Now I switched to Nikon, and I bought a D800 directly. I only regret having sold the camera lens Canon EF 100 mm IS USM. But a big goal like that, I do not need with the poor stupid autofocus of the 5D. Now for my wonderful Nikon D800 I took a Nikon AF-S Nikkor Micro 105mm f2.8 G VR. One of the best lenses absolute. Now I have ALL: perfect sensor, resolution, speed, Nikon Creative Lighting System, professionalism, everything. I’m not sorry, I’m delighted to be switched to Nikon.

            • FrancoisR
              September 25, 2012 at 2:40 pm

              Anson R

              Funny how perspectives are different. I love my 5D2 and I’m not too crazy about the D800 yet. Did you hear about the thread on the lemon with assymetric AF and the poor support it got from the manufacturer? It’s on this site. One thing I know the D800 takes great shots while sitting on the sofa (I’m lucky mine is ok). But on bumpy roads in a 4×4, the 5D2 really rocks! So to each his own and need to bash at one brand or the other.

            • Abhijith
              September 25, 2012 at 10:03 pm

              You talk good about canon or not. No one really cares. And even which camera you uses doesn’t matter. just what you do with it matters.

              And regarding 5d series taking 3 generations to get a good autofocus, i’d say the 5dmk2 should have had the AF system of 7d. And more than the number of previous models with bad AF, the time they took to bring up 5dmk3 is what matters. 3 long years.

              And also, you are talking as if the previous models in 5d lineup sucked in AF. So id doesn’t matter if it has good AF, it still sucks! No please.

              I’ve worked with 5dmk3 and D800. Not just for one day. And i can tell you. 5dmk3 is a camera which doesn’t deserve to be in 5d series. It is so good in AF than the previous models that it should have been named as a seperate model.

              And as i have said earlier, it is not just an AF update. People who sit at their home and read the specification of their camera may think it’s all the same camera with better AF. But people who uses it will understand how better it is.

              Yes. the EF 100mm is a good lens. The AF-S VR 105mm f/2.8G is also as good as.

              And finally, don’t claim to have attained professionalism by changing brands. A professional would know how to make use of his camera even if whatever useless camera it may be. Have ever heard “a bad worker always blames his tools”?? Think how to use your camera knowing it’s shortcomings instead of complaining.

              I have friends who bought D800 and another one who bought 5dmk3(not their first camera from the same brand for each) . Both were unsatisfied with those. The one with d800 always had to crop pics out of what he shot and ended up with getting below average quality.(he bought d800 itself because he thought it’d be better because of all those extra pixels available for cropping). And one with 5dmk3 was not satisfied with the dynamic range of the jpeg pics. They exchanged their cameras and whole equipments, and are shooting happily now.

        • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin Romanas Naryškin
          September 23, 2012 at 11:59 pm

          Anson, I’m really glad you found Nikon to be such a revelation. I’m am, honestly, very happy for you.

          The only thing I disagree with is that Nikon is better. You forgot a keyword – it’s better for YOU. Not for everyone. :) Mind you, I am a Nikon user, too.

        • Abhijith
          September 25, 2012 at 5:37 am

          How come you describe 5Dmkiii as just an autofocus update?? :S

          All 5d series updates were complete new cameras.

          I agree that it’s not so much different if numbers and specifications are what matters to you.

          But still they are different in more ways than similarities.
          1. First of all the sensor is a completely new design. it was made in such a way that it will be exactly 3 times the dimensions of a full HD video resolution. (ie:1920×1280. multiply both by three and you get mark3’s resolution (5670×3840). It is now way similar to the mark 2’s sensor. (have heard many stupid comments saying that it is just mark 2 sensor with few horizontal and vertical rows. NO!!)
          2. Even the processor is different.
          3. ISO range is better and more usable.
          4. Maximum shooting rate is near double.
          5. Better viewfinder with more coverage.
          6. AF. i don want to comment how superior it is. Even if AF was the only thing which is changed, it’d have been a good camera.
          7. The silent shutter which David mentioned.

          Well. these are things which matters for people who like to talk about their camera. For those who use it, mark 3 is ergonomically way more superior to mark 2. And is a camera which is more usable on work.

  28. 28) jukekey
    September 19, 2012 at 12:01 pm

    differentiators to me would be the handy popup flash, ability to focus in extreme low light…this along with the quality lens would have been a great product from canon

  29. 29) Rohan
    September 19, 2012 at 1:18 pm

    Hi Roman,
    Great write up. Can you please post a comparison of the Nikon D600 vs Canon 5D Mark III? Esp after DXO mark rates it way higher than the 5D Mark III.

    I was first deciding between the D800 and 5D III. Bought a D800 and then had to return it due to left focus issues. The 36 MP was also way too much for my needs and the camera was a little unforgiving for handheld shots. I was waiting for the 5D3 to drop in price to ~$2,500 (Missed the fire sale Adorama had on eBay last weekend where they sold 800+ 5D3s @2,750) and then came the D600.

    If the 5D3 sells again on eBay for ~$2,750 and the D600 being priced at $2,100, it would be a nice comparison between the two. Is the 5D3 worth the $650 more than the D600.


  30. 30) EagleS
    September 19, 2012 at 3:18 pm


  31. 31) Kenneth
    September 19, 2012 at 11:43 pm

    I just visited DxOMark. The result is awesome. ISO test is just under D3S and superior to D800, D800e and even D4.

    RIP 6D.

  32. 32) rmtjin
    September 20, 2012 at 2:58 pm

    Regarding the AF performance of the Canon; at -3 EV, what kind of shutter speed would be required at “normal appertures”? Say 4 or 5.6?
    Or rather, what ISO levels would you need to get usable handheld pictures at those low levels?
    It’s nice to be able to focus in dim/no light, but it will not matter if you require 1 second shutterspeeds at ISO 12800, f/4……
    Could you give us some examples of (usable and handheld) combinations for shutterspeed/aperture/iso at -3EV? (obviously no flash as Canon wants us to believe)

  33. 33) ertan elma
    September 20, 2012 at 4:42 pm

    The first affordable full frame camera was Sony A850, not D600.

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 33.1) Romanas Naryškin
      September 21, 2012 at 1:35 am

      That is, in fact, true. And it was actually MORE affordable than either D600 or 6D.

      The only thing that makes me rather doubtful is that A850, in essence, was A900, stripped down of a couple of features (viewfinder and buffer), and brought down in price where A900 should’ve been by then (more or less). It was also rather outdated.

      Still, I’ve no reason to argue. It really was the first affordable FF body. That is why I wasn’t particularly impressed with the price of these cameras, nor certain features (mostly, I expected a higher build quality with no plastic panels). Still, Sony failed to make a big splash with A850’s price, and these cameras did. They are much like Nikon D1 – although there were other digital cameras before it, it was D1 that made sufficient progress to start a digital revolution.

  34. 34) Le
    September 26, 2012 at 8:04 am


    Just wanna say thank you for the great reviews. Only thing is that i just found your site, i wish i did a little more googling to have found you earlier. I am eagerly waiting for the D600 review. I have a D700 and wondering if I should upgrade to D800/D800E (is there a comparison between the two flavors you have done) or D600. I shoot wildlife, portrait and weddings..

  35. 35) Chris
    September 26, 2012 at 10:34 pm

    Haha! Roman, you seem to have opened a real can of worms! But you handle it very well — I’ve always been impressed with how reasonable and polite this site has been, and I hope it stays that way.

    I have had a D800 for a few months, and recently bought a D600, as well. I previously used a D700, which I loved, but found a little too heavy and bulky as an air travel kit with 2.8 FX zooms, so I had a D7000 as my travel kit. The plan was to see which of the new cameras (the 800 and 600) I liked more and to sell the other; however, I’ve fallen in love and decided to keep both. I also bought the 24-85 vr kit lens for the D600, and use this as my “light kit” — the lens isn’t up to the quality of the 2.8’s, but it’s superior to DX lenses I used with the 7000, and more than adequate for my purposes. I’ve found that a picture captured, even with “good” rather than “great” lenses, is better than no picture at all.

    I don’t want to get into the tussle of Nikon vs. Canon, as I find the whole question too personal and subjective, though I confess I believe that Canon could and should have made their new 6D more competitive spec-wise to the D600, or they could and should have priced it lower.

    However, as to comments on the D800 demanding better technique to achieve acceptable results, on par with cameras of lower resolution, that has not been my experience, as long as the comparison is of same-size prints. It’s true that if one is comparing at the pixel level, the higher resolution of the 800 will reveal more flaws, but at the same print size my experience has been that the 800’s greater resolution, even with less-than-perfect glass and technique, produces superior results compared to cameras of substantially-lesser resolution. I have also found the auto focus to be quite snappy on the 800 — at least as good as my old 700. How that compares to Canon’s AF, I’ll leave to others…

  36. 36) Mike
    November 21, 2012 at 7:26 am

    While I’m not directly arguing any specifc point with this, i thought I would add a couple of fine points that people keep missing….

    As someone that has been looking to upgrade from an APS-C based system (Canon 20D) for quite some time, the 6D was supposed to be the camera for users like me! Given that I have far exceeded the original $1700 I spent on my body in lenses (I think at this point I have most of the common L series zooms and a few primes to boot) spending $2k on a body is fine with me.

    1) while the 6D does only have one SD card slot, it’s at least an SDXC which has a current capacity of 128GB and a max theoretical of 2TB. Quite a number of reviews gloss over this point. For video, it should be sufficient.

    2) There hasn’t been much word on the WiFi and automatic uploading features available through Canon’s web site. I hope it doesn’t suck, this is one feature that my iPhone trumps my DSLR on every time. I love being able to post quick pics up without a whole lot of fuss. Being able to do so with better looking pictures would be great.

    3) The GPS feature is nice, I just hope they put a compass and accelerometer in there as well. Being able to know location AND pointing angle would be huge for landscape fotographers (and I bet google would mind either)

    4) the 1/200th flash sync is pretty low and will make open aperture daylight flash fills harder to do at anything above 1/50.

    5) the 1/4000 seems uncharacteristically slow for the spot that it fits in the line

    6) the lack of 7 HDR images, or the ability to do HDR to RAW is hurtful to landscape photographers. Hopefully this will be rectified in a firmware update.

    7) I haven’t been able to figure out what e RAW+JPEG possibilities are for the camera given only one SD slot. With automatic uploading, I’d want to do JPEG, but I’d need to have RAW as well for the real stuff. I haven’t shot JPEGs EVER with my current DSLR.

    8) polycarbonate body… Yuk! My 20d has a magnesium body, that’s one of the things I really like about the 20D.

    9) completely different layout of buttons from the 7D, 5DmkIII and my 20D.

    while I don’t feel like shelling out $3299 for a 5DMkIII I would gladly pay a few hundred dollars more for a camera with a few of these things “fixed”. It might be a sign of the times, but when I got my 20D it was expensive, but it felt like I was paying for a quality camera. The 6D sits in a weird spot, it’s a smaller and seems stripped down, like a Rebel line but with a FF sensor. For this reason it seems “cheap” even when I compare it to something like a 7D. I’m planning on waiting for some real good hands on reviews before I decide what to do. Given my collection of glass, jumping to a D600 isn’t an option.

    • 36.1) abhijith
      November 21, 2012 at 9:02 am

      you seem to be in need off too much or wanted to give 10 negative but only could make just 9 :D

      • 36.1.1) mike
        November 23, 2012 at 6:51 am

        Odd, I didn’t think they were all negative, and I started with 3 things, but while typing it grew to 9. After looking over my ancient 20D, it does indeed have 1/250 flash sync and 1/8000 shutter max speed. After more consideration I believe Canon thinks the 6D is a Rebel with full frame and nothing more. I guess I’m going to pony up the cash for a 5DmkIII

        • abhijith
          November 25, 2012 at 8:09 am

          :D I felt that canon was juust making use of the demand for a low end full frame camera. They din care to make it too good. But, still it’ll sell well. That’s sure. Such is the brand value of canon n nikon. And their ecosystems.

          I support your decision. 5dmk3 is a all different game. just look at the comment below.

  37. 37) FrancoisR
    November 21, 2012 at 9:57 am

    Hello Mike,

    I went for the 5D3 and I’m just fond of it (paid 3k all included). One point though. I find the card management much better on the D800 with its USB 3 support, good access to cards (CF and SD) and flexibility. But the 5D3 is a REAL performer compared to it and it does best what it’s been designed for. I mean shooting pictures. I never miss a shot with it while the D800 is quite finicky (IMHO). I too have a bunch of “L” lenses that I love…

  38. 38) Hank
    December 8, 2012 at 9:55 pm

    After much tortured deliberation, I have bought the Canon 6D instead of the D600 even though on paper, the latter is superior. GPS didn’t sway me. It was the Canon EF 24mm f2.8 IS USM prime that did it. This is a new prime that promises much potential – wide aperture with image stabilization equivalent to 4 stops. This is more versatile than the Nikon 24mm f.4 which costs almost 3X more than the Canon prime. This Canon prime made me overlook D600’s edge in AF focus points, pixelcount, 2card slot, better viewfinder. The secondary factor that swayed me to 6D is that it is smaller and lighter.

    • 38.1) FullFrameJunkie
      March 14, 2013 at 7:41 pm

      It’s not just superior on paper. If you held both of them in your hands you could see that the 6D has no flash, no second card slot, a smaller LCD, inferior viewfinder coverage, a slower synch speed, no video headphone jack, and on and on. But notice one thing. Canon may have gutted their camera but they didn’t gut the pricetag. They’re still charging you the same price as the Nikon that does have all these things. If I were you, I’d be pissed.

  39. 39) Prof. G.
    December 11, 2012 at 12:19 pm

    I just read that there will be some nice rebates on the D600 and the D800 BUT have they solved the sensor dust problem????
    LensRental has found that there is a dust problem — the last I read.

    Thank you.

  40. 40) Marco
    February 27, 2013 at 2:32 am

    Any news on the Canon 6D review?

  41. February 27, 2013 at 2:42 am

    These comparisons are hardly of any use. Nikon users with fleet of Nikkor lenses will have to buy D600 and likewise Canon users with Canon lenses will have to choose 6D.

    It all depends on whether the user needs this body. If really necessary; one will have to get the body that supports his/her lenses.

  42. 42) FullFrameJunkie
    March 14, 2013 at 7:31 pm

    There’s an error in the 6D LCD size. It’s 3.0inches and not 3.2

  43. 43) hank5
    March 15, 2013 at 3:52 am

    Bought the Canon 6D over the Nikon D600 after some thorough research. I owned the D700 and D3100 both of which were stolen. Main reasons for opting for Canon 6D – more streamlined, and lighter than Nikon D600 (for travel purposes).

    Took my Sony RX100, and Canon 6D recently on US trip. 90% of my pics were taken with the RX100 simply because it was more practical and more convenient to use.

    The Canon 6D pairs well with the 24mm f2.8 USM IS, and the pancake 40mm f2.8 STM.

  44. 44) Murat Kilic
    May 22, 2013 at 10:37 pm

    Hello Everyone,

    I own a D600 and my best mate owns a Canon 6D.

    While both cameras are almost identical in features and aim at a similar market, I thought I’d give a quick summary of my observations so far from our photo walks:

    Nikon- Better as a walk around camera, better lenses to choose from and much sharper images overall, the built in flash is really useful, to me more than the GPS. I have an add on flash however don’t really use it as the built in one does 99% of what the add on will.
    Canon- Shoots much better in low light situations, night photography way ahead of the Nikon and feels amazing in the hand and lighter. The lack of flash is annoying however the good low light performance kind of makes up for it.

    I think there is no ‘better’ camera, rather it should be a choice of each individual. Rather than focusing on the body, i think one should pay more attention to the lenses used. No point having a Ferrari if you’re running on diesel…


  45. February 27, 2014 at 7:33 am

    Вечная борьба, что лучше Canon или Nikon? Мой взгляд на камеры: есть фф или кроп, а все остальные примочки по сути по необходимости. Центральной точки фокусировки хватает за глаза, достаточно только научиться ею пользоваться. На мой взгляд обе камеры хороши, а выбор у каждого свой ;)

    • 45.1) Viktor
      May 13, 2014 at 12:44 pm


  46. 46) Viktor
    May 13, 2014 at 12:44 pm

    First of all we all know problems with D600… Nikon really dropped the ball with this model and they reputation and now they recalling D600 and replacing them with D610 – Shame and lost of trust. Thats important.

    2nd point – canon users won’t switch to nikon and other way around. So this article is pretty much for ppl who don’t own Canon or Nikon products.

    3rd point – u can’t compare cameras based on just spec. On paper it might look like crap but try using it and u will change ur mind. So many test proven for example that Canon is doing better with ISO and low light and focusing in a low light. Plus don’t forget since we are talking about people who are new to canon and nikon – Kit lenses – Canon L lens is way better then Nikons kit glass…

    Anyway, my point is – both cameras are great. Both full frame. Both have cons and pros. And it’s a great start. It’s like comparing iPhone to Android. The is no winner here to my opinion.

    Also don’t forget – bodies come and go, good glass stays.

  47. 47) G P Hanson
    July 25, 2015 at 7:21 am

    Hi Nazim, I have a Nikon D600 no dust issues. You forgot to mention the Nikon CLS system (worth it alone), customisable metering modes including spot metering on all 39 points (very useful). The D600 all round just better for photographers who need the sheer flexibility of the nikon system. If all you want is pleasant sooc jpegs then get the 6D and knock yourself out.

Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *