Personal View site logo
Make sure to join PV Telegram channel! Perfect to keep up with community on your smartphone.
Official Nikon D600 and D610 topic
  • 231 Replies sorted by
  • Thank you for sharing your experience with the clean HDMI out. Initially this is why I purchased the D600 to record clean HDMI out, but of course this was not fixed until recently with the new firmware. I guess the decision I have to make now is which HDMI capture device to buy.

    Best Regards,

  • Would by any chance anyone be willing to upload a few seconds of ProRes/Uncompressed footage recorder from the D600 with an external recorder? I'm seriously looking at the D600 and am wondering how the recorded HDMI out (I currently own a Hyperdeck Shuttle 2) holds up in post..

  • Need hack to compare against D600

    I recently bought a d600 with a Tamron 24-70mm/2.8, about $3,000 worth of camera. In good light, the video is amazing. However, in mediocre light it degrades faster than I expected. My problem with the Nikon setup is the camera is BIG and HEAVY. I shoot mostly friends and family. I'm already leaving it home more often than not. For photographs, I have a Sigma dp1 and dp2s, which deliver the same full-frame IQ in the size of a small P&S.

    My problem is that I'm not convinced the full-frame video is worth all that size and weight (and money invested). So I went out and bought a GF3 and hacked it. I've picked up from this forum that the GF3 is mostly a joke. So far, NO JOKE to me! Except for the expected weakness with color (compared to full-frame), the depth of field is shallow enough and the quality near that of the D600 (dare I say that?). But how near? I'm going to do some side-by-side tests this weekend with the Nikon D600, my GF3 and a G5 I picked up for cheap on Amazon.

    So my question here is, can you give me a link to a hack/settings that you think would bring the GF3 closest to the D600. I will apply that hack for my tests. Right now I think I have driftwood something or other.

    Unless the D600 can really beat one of these cameras (I'm talking knock-out) I'll sell it and get the Sigma dp3m for portraits and do my video in a G-something. (And also wait for BM camera)

    (As many have commented, finding hacks on this site for a newbie is some kind of cruel initiation rite. I'm almost 52, so I hope you'll baby me a bit ;)

    Thanks in advance for your time!

    my blog is at maxotics.com btw.

  • @maxotics

    Sell the D600 and purchase a GH2 if what you are after is a small form factor and awesome video quality. I actually prefer the bigger size and build quality of the D600. I have both and they both have their strong points and weak points. Elaborating on the build quality of the GH2, my friend was sitting in a chair with his GH2 in his lap and the camera slipped and fell onto a rubber mat. The camera sensor actually got damaged just from that small drop $400 dollars to repair. Instead of repairing it he just purchased another used one.

    I have a question for you do you have primes for the D600? Purchase some prime lenses maybe a 85mm 1.8G lens and try that out before you decide sell it. With adapters you could always use the Nikon lenses on the M/43 cameras if you sell the camera. I still intend on using the D600 for video but only for certain types of shots. The GH2 is way better for video but not so much for stills. I guess you could sell the D600 and purchase a GH3 but I still don't think it would be as good as the Nikon D600 for stills.

  • @Azo, thanks for your input! Yes, I have a manual Rokinon 85/1.4 prime which seems to work well. I wish it could focus closer. (I have to say the Tamron 24-70mm/2.8 is very nice for a zoom!) Except for the added resolution, I don't believe the D-600 takes any better still than a 5D (original) I had with a Sigma 85mm prime. Not sure it is worth the $1,000 price differential on that basis. Thoughts?

    I was using a Nikkor 50mm/1.4 on the GF3/G5 but then bought an E-P1, mostly for a c-mount lens, and figured I'd mothball the Olympus 50mm/1.8 lens that came with it, but found that lens may work better than the Nikkor (less flare at 1.8).

    Anyway, as a stills only camera, I'm not blown away by the D-600. My original plan was to get a Sigma DP3M (effective 70mm) for portraits. Most likely, I will sell the D600 and do that. I love having full-frame imaging cameras that I can fit in my jacket. As for video, the D600 has better color saturation and depth then the G5, of course, but it still looks like crap to me. Faces are miscolored and pasty. Clarity-wise, the G5 seems every bit as sharp as the D600.

    The only video I've been on the Internet that looks good to me is from RAW. So today I'm buying a Canon 50D and 1,000 speed CF card to try the Magic Lantern hack. Otherwise, I don't find the D600 video to be that much better than the MFT video. Not better enough to deal with all those DSLR video headaches. What do you think about that?

  • @maxotics Well in regard to stills and video I also look at the workflow. I initially wanted to purchase the D800 but I felt the file sizes were not worth it for me. I only shoot in raw for stills.

    Same with video when I first heard of the hack for the 5D Mark III. I thought awesome I will finally have the all in one camera that can do everything. Then I heard about the workflow and files sizes and thought well this is definately not for me. Who knows maybe the workflow will change in the next couple of months and become a lot easier.

    I personally am not ready for that type of workflow. I use Final Cut Pro X because it is super simple and fast to edit with so this is perfect for my needs. I do not have the time nor the patience to learn all of the other programs that are necessary for the 5D Mark III raw hack. But different strokes for different folks so if this workflow works for you awesome.

    For my purposes the GH2 and D600 more then meet my needs. Dont get me wrong though, if the workflow was easy and I could just edit the raw files with Final Cut then this would probably sway me to the Canon 5D Mark III.

    I looked at some footage from the 50D and to be honest I was not impressed. On the other hand I saw some raw footage from the 5DIII that I thought looked really good.

    I personally think you would be better off with a GH2 when you factor everything in. Workflow, lens selection, flip out lcd, built in viewfinder, smaller file sizes, easier workflow, etc etc.

    Anyway good luck with your 50D :) I hope it works out for you...

  • @maxotics

    With all due respect, everyone is entitled to their own opinions but to say your not impressed by D600 stills leads me to believe you do not know what your doing. Nikon makes some of the best FF sensors with beautiful color rendition and lowest amount of noise per pixel density. As @Azo mentioned a GH2 would be more suitable for your purposes. Don't give up on the D600 just yet - slap a Sigma 35/1.4 on that and you're good to go.

  • @last_SHIFT Sorry, I didn't mean the D600 wasn't a great stills camera, only that the 5D, for its resolution, gives pleasing full-frame quality images. The price difference question, for me, is more about video, not stills. If I was only using the camera for photography, believe me, I'd have NO complaints. You're right, no other camera in its price range can resolve detail in images. I didn't mean to knock the camera at all! My beef with its video applies to ALL DSLR video.

  • @maxotics,

    Sure I hear that. That is the general problem, as all these FF cams are mainly stills cameras, alas the D600/800/D4/5D3/1DX do not even have 1080/60p! Personally I use a D800 +GH2 - everything balances it out for me. Cheers

  • Hi all,

    But what about hacking the firmware of our beast? I only see people talking about the 30 minute limit but stuff like 100% zoom like the D800 I would like to see appearing. I would pay for it too.

    Regards

  • @peterweter Nikon is falling further and further behind Canon with the new generation of photographers, IMHO. The only reason I bought the D600, on Craigslist, was that I wanted a full frame and I didn't see any 6Ds. I figured I'd try the D600 out. I was sure it had its benefits. I'm 52 years old and had original Nikon Fs. I appreciate the build and solidness of the camera. I'm sure the extra resolution and image is worth the investment to many people. Please don't think I'm bashing Nikon. But I see no compelling reason to stick with it. It was fun putting an old Nikkor 50mm on it, yet doubt I'll actually use that lens. Like many, I'm going to focus on Canon because the company is friendly to hackers--to the whole traditional spirit of photography which is always experimental. I just bought a 50D for $500 (with lens!) and put the Magic Lantern RAW hack on it. [My first 50D Raw Video] (

    ) There's NO reason Nikon couldn't open their cameras up to this. I'm going to compare both cameras. I'm pretty sure the 5-year old Canon, with hack, is going to smoke the modern D-600 in video. However, if someone here says they think the D600 is close to being hacked for RAW video, I would certainly consider keeping it.

  • @maxotics I agree fully!

    But I see no progression in the Nikon D600 hacks? True?

  • What I found interesting in that video is that he mentioned CCDs have better characteristics in good light. They also don't suffer from rolling-shutter but have been jettisoned by the big makers because they can get better low-light from CMOS. I don't want anyone to think I'm bashing Nikon because I could NOT have gotten these shots with most other cameras

    [Flickr D600 Low Light] (http://www.flickr.com/photos/maxotics/sets/72157634891578611/)

    However, I'd prefer a CCD full-frame camera with good low-ISO video (no rolling shutter), than low light. Call me a fool ;)

    I believe the Panasonic FZ47 was the last CCD camera that Panasonic made. What do you think of that video quality, Vitaliy? Is there a hack? No rolling shutter, right?

    No one ever gave me good hack setting here, to compare the GF3 and Nikon D600. I ended up doing more with the G5. I have concluded that though the D600 has the potential to do better video than the GF3/G5, in actual practice, it's too difficult to use, which leads to poor video. Even with both cameras set up perfectly, I'm pretty sure no one I know would see one as being better than the other.

    [Maxotics blog on D600 and GF3 Hack] (http://maxotics.com/?p=35)

    Also, ditto @peterweter. D600 hack?

  • Nikon DSLR's are currently the best choice for video capture of high-contrast scenes, due to Nikon's Custom Picture Controls. This type of shooting is at the opposite end of the scale from low-light videography, and demands careful attention to both highlight exposure and gamma curve. I'm currently working on custom curves to provide full-range gamma control for RAW processing, but the project requires unique sets of curves for each Nikon model. I plan on supporting the D5100, D5200, D7000, D7100, D600, D800, D800e, and D4.

    Here's an example frame of a high-contrast scene taken with a D5200, using a custom gamma curve to amplify shadow details in-camera. It was shot in direct midday sunlight without a keylight, casting the model's face and body in a backlit shadow. The D5200's wide dynamic range at ISO 100 allowed me to capture both the blue sky and the model's skin tones with very good image quality. Of course, better results could be achieved with professional lighting, but my aim was to see how well the camera could do on its own.

    image

    BB070912_0046.jpg
    1920 x 1080 - 322K
  • @LPowell, first I'm a big fan of yours! Love your posts. At first, I LOVED the D600 video. No longer. It seems that bright and contrasty is all that it does really well (sorry). I find it difficult to get much dynamic range. I printed out your tip sheet and used it. However, I see a ton of potential in the RAW footage I'm shooting with an old Canon 50D. Even doing the fast, lower-quality workflow, RAW straight to Cineform422, I can get all kinds of looks in my NLE through color/contrast, etc. I'd LOVE to hear your thoughts on my experiments.

    Day 1: SEE ABOVE

    Day 2:

    Day 3:

    Please keep in mind that I'm just learning how to grade video. Also, I am making rookie mistakes with each camera. I'm happy to set up the D600 against the 50D, in a setting, and follow your instructions for a better comparison if you have the time to tell me what to do with the D600.

    I wrote about some of the D600/MFT stuff on my blog

    http://maxotics.com/?p=35

    Thanks!

  • @Lpowell I tried to do a simple test of a scene with bright sun and highlights. I tried to get both clips to match each other as closely as possible; that is, not to favor one over the other.

    Thoughts?

  • Personally, like I said I am not impressed with the footage from the 50D there is moire and all kinda stuff going on. To be quite honest and blunt... I do not know why you would purchase the 50D when you could have purchased the BPCC instead. Makes absolutely no sense! Thoughts?

    A good percentage of the footage that you have posted is underexposed, overexposed, white balance totally off, etc etc. Every camera has their strong points and weak points learn how to get the best footage from each camera and work their strong points. @maxotics I don't mean to be rude but after a while it does get a little old because you are basically saying the same thing over and over. If you are unhappy with the D600 sell it and move on.

    In regard to testing I somewhat understand what you are trying to do. But I think it would be more helpful and fair to try and expose the footage to the best of your ability and then show the footage. What you are doing is akin to me taking a camera that only shoots JPEGS and then grabbing another camera that shoots RAW and saying hear look at this isn't this so much better. Also, along those lines I know for a fact that I can get WAY better footage out of my D600 then the stuff that you posted. YOU are actually making footage from the D600 look like crap, it is not the camera!

    I don't know if you just have no idea what you are doing or what but like I said the footage is terrible. Even on the RAW footage that you posted white balance, lighting etc etc terrible. I have ignored your posts for awhile, but I want to set the record straight and point out that the D600 is actually a very good for video providing that you know what you are doing and work the strong points of the camera. Is it good for everything absolutely not but please keep in mind that first and foremost this camera was designed for stills with video as an added bonus. One last thing purchase a Ninja2 external recorder if you want the best video quality from D600.

  • @Azo, thank you for your comments. Feel free to be blunt, but please allow me to be also. I bought the 50D for $500 with lens. How much is the BMCC with lens? This is a forum mostly about hacks and getting the most out of consumer cameras. So I wouldn't say my purchase made absolutely no sense. Yes?

    I agree with you that I am struggling with the exposure, white balance, etc. But you're not helping by just pointing it out with no instructions on how to improve. I am NOT saying the same thing over and over again. I am providing real comparative footage (no matter how weak) that shows what I think I see.

    If you believe the D600 takes better footage YOU should post some comparative video or send me to a link. Your opinion, against mine, may be the better one (probably is) but you're not backing it up. I agree, I may be making it look like crap. That's why I posted it here and asked for LPowell's suggestions. I am NOT trying to dislike the D600.

    Again, I would LOVE for you to set the record straight. But you need to do so with evidence. I still can't get the D600 to provide the high dynamic-range film-look I think I get from the 50D RAW. Over time, I believe I will improve my skills in both cameras, and am aiming to do what you suggest, but this is a learning experience.

    In all due respect, are you sure your mind is open to RAW footage from Magic Lantern?

    Here is the best demonstration I found on RAW vs H.264

  • @maxotics The strong suit of the Nikon DSLR's is the deep dynamic range of the image sensor at ISO 100, coupled with the ability to manipulate the gamma curve in-camera with custom Picture Controls. This enables you to balance the tonality of high-contrast scenes in-camera, before it is encoded into H.264. While Canon provides some comparable features, the customization mechanisms and software they provide are not as flexible as Nikon's.

    As with still photography, RAW image capture can provide vastly more post-processing potential than 8-bit compressed formats, but imposes huge throughput and storage requirements on your workflow. For my purposes, current Quad-core/1TB technology is capable enough to handle RAW stills and 100Mbps compressed video. RAW/4K video is on the horizon, but realistically I think we'll need 256-core GPU processing and 10TB drives to make the workflow practical. At that point, I expect we'll have some highly modular RAW motion capture devices to choose among.

  • @LPowell, the last scene in my comparison video was shot at 100 ISO. Some people keep forgetting I think the D600 an awesome still camera :) Back to video... I agree, if you follow a high-quality workflow for RAW, then yes, you need a super-fast computer, hardware, storage, the whole nine yards. But I'm taking some shortcuts which make the workflow very easy. I shoot RAW, copy the file to a folder. I then run RAWanizer on it, which uses the GoPro/Cineform CODEC to convert that RAW file into Cineform 422 (AVI). I'm not extracting each frame as a DNG, and doing all the correction that way. I go from a RAW file to an AVI file in about 15 seconds, (for a 15-second clip) on an old HP i7. MY WORKFLOW IS EASY AND FAST. So I'm color correcting on the Cineform file which isn't much larger than what comes out of the D600. But even with that low-end RAW workflow I see more detail in the RAW originated footage. I am NOT saying it is better than the D600. It just has a look I can't get from the D600. Maybe @Azo is right and I just don't know how.

    I doubt it can be done. As you recognize, there's only so much you can do with each frame from the D600 output, maybe 60kb?, against about 5,000kb of useful image information from each RAW frame.

    And I'm not trying to pick on Nikon. I just happen to have a D600 instead of a Canon 5D. If I had the 5D I'd be saying the same things about its compressed video.

    I think what you're doing for Nikon is great. I'd love to understand how to get better video out of it. But it's a great stills camera that takes some video. All DSLR video stinks in IMHO, RAW may be a way out. I wish Nikon would release firmware that allowed raw from this camera. If I end up selling the camera and they do that a week later I'll be crushed!

  • @maxotics

    thank you for your comments. Feel free to be blunt, but please allow me to be also. I bought the 50D for $500 with lens. How much is the BMCC with lens? This is a forum mostly about hacks and getting the most out of consumer cameras. So I wouldn't say my purchase made absolutely no sense. Yes?

    The BMCC and BPCC are two different cameras. The BPCC is only $995.00, if you purchase the M4/3 mount you can use almost any lens that you desire. So IMO $995.00 is not that far off from $500.00 and you could use your existing lenses with the appropriate adapter. So yes it makes sense to me to purchase that camera instead of hacking the 50D. Do you want the best quality from your D600? Once again purchase the Ninja2 external recorder this will give you the best possible video quality from this camera.

    Anyway's, I am sorry if I came across as a jerk. For a little while I thought that you were purposely underexposing/overexposing to make the D600 footage look worse then it actually is. Anyway here are some items that are essential to me I hope this helps you as well.

    1. Passport Color Checker = This really helps with photography as well as shooting video.

    2. Photovision 14" Pocket One Shot Digital Target = Basically for white balance

    3. Light Meter = To me this is an absolute must if you want to nail the exposure... Especially considering that the D600 cannot shoot raw video.

    4. Lighting = IMO this is another absolute must. If the scene is not lit properly any camera will look like crap because you will have to increase the gain.

    I use Final Cut ProX for my editing but also have the Adobe CS6 suite. There are several different plugins for Final Cut ProX that makes color correction/white balance really easy. So invest another $100-200 and figure out which one of the white balance plugins work best for you. Neat video will also help with the noise in your videos so this is highly recommended as well.

    I have attached some images that basically show the items listed above. I also have several different types of led lights as well a bunch of compact florescent lights with different size soft boxes etc. There are to many things to list as far as my gear. Everybody is different and will have different needs for gear but I thought that I would share the basics with you.

    In regard to D600 video quality, here is some videos that illustrate what can be done with the D600.

    @maxotics seriously... I am not trying to be sarcastic but if you are happy with the footage and workflow from the 50D, you should seriously consider selling the D600 and purchasing the 5D Mark III. I would if I where in your shoes. IMO the Canon 5D Mark III seems better suited for video then the D600. The Canon 5D shoots All-I or IPB H.264 or MPEG-4. Add in the awesome Magic Lantern Hack and it is hard to resist.

    Best Regards

    1.jpg
    1920 x 1282 - 1M
    2.jpg
    1920 x 1282 - 921K
    3.jpg
    1920 x 1282 - 1M
    4.jpg
    1920 x 1282 - 956K
  • @Azo, I'm glad we're not enemies! I do feel bad that much of the stuff I put up is half-baked. I don't blame you for getting frustrated with me or thinking I have a score to settle. Believe me, if the BMCC was out now I'd buy it. But it's not. And I got the RAW bug, but also kids to put through school. So the 5DmkIII is not something I could buy in good conscience. I'm stretching it far with the D600 as it is. In any case, I'm having fun with the 50D.

    Went to buy those color cards. $100! Shesh! (Found one used on Amazon for $80). Anyway, I HOPE YOU'RE SATISFIED! Next time I'm going to be careful before asking for advice ;)

    Seriously, I know it's what I need to tackle, to move forward.

    Thanks!