D600 already tested on DxOMark, new benchmark

gazonk · 09-19-2012, 01:21 PM - **1 Like**

Given that it has lower pixel density than the K-5, it doesn't score any better than one should expect from a new FF sensor - so no shock here. But at least we now know that the 24mp sensor is pretty good, and if the Pentax FF will use the same sensor, we can expect good performance.

civiletti · 09-19-2012, 01:29 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by gazonk

Given that it has lower pixel density than the K-5, it doesn't score any better than one should expect from a new FF sensor - so no shock here. But at least we now know that the 24mp sensor is pretty good, and if the Pentax FF will use the same sensor, we can expect good performance.

What Pentax FF? By the time one emerges, Nikon will have the next generation available.

gazonk · 09-19-2012, 01:32 PM

Originally posted by civiletti

What Pentax FF? By the time one emerges, Nikon will have the next generation available.

The one that they've now practically admitted that is coming in about a year. If Nikon already replaces the D600 (or D800) within a year, it would be a first, even for them.

einstrigger · 09-19-2012, 01:48 PM

^They've been dangling that carrot for far too long. A year? I haven't seen any official announcements about that. And so long as that's the case, the Pentax FF will just continue to be vaporware, as it's been for the past few years. Emphasis on the YEARS.

rawr · 09-19-2012, 02:10 PM - **2 Likes**

As I said somewhere else, it is worth noting that the D600's DxO numbers for dynamic range equal that of the K-5, the color-depth numbers are only 5% apart, and the low-light ISO numbers are only 1-1.5 stops different.

Before everyone slashes their wrists about the D600's DxO score, FF, Pentax, etc, while the D600 is an impressive beast, the DxOMark score reveals that the differences between it and a fine camera like the K-5 aren't exactly night-and-day.

If you don't shoot a lot of low-light and are happy with 16MP, the D600 is almost a big yawn for K-5 users.

**7samurai** · 09-19-2012, 03:51 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by civiletti

The D600 is quite impressive for a $2100 body. The K5IIs is $1300.

Really amazing what $800 gets you: full frame, raw full HD video out, better flash system, better auto focus, longer warranties, better support from 3rd party lens makers.

**7samurai** · 09-19-2012, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by rawr

As I said somewhere else, it is worth noting that the D600's DxO numbers for dynamic range equal that of the K-5, the color-depth numbers are only 5% apart, and the low-light ISO numbers are only 1-1.5 stops different.

Before everyone slashes their wrists about the D600's DxO score, FF, Pentax, etc, while the D600 is an impressive beast, the DxOMark score reveals that the differences between it and a fine camera like the K-5 aren't exactly night-and-day.

If you don't shoot a lot of low-light and are happy with 16MP, the D600 is almost a big yawn for K-5 users.

To tell you the truth, I don't really understand the DXO scores. I just care about the images, type, and style of images I take. Looking forward to more real world images.

Laurentiu Cristofor · 09-19-2012, 05:01 PM

Originally posted by 7samurai

To tell you the truth, I don't really understand the DXO scores.

If you want to understand them, they explain them in the About section. I also wrote this short overview here.

Sol Invictus · 09-19-2012, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by 7samurai

Really amazing what $800 gets you: full frame, raw full HD video out, better flash system, better auto focus, longer warranties, better support from 3rd party lens makers.

Great point.

**Deimos** · 09-19-2012, 05:14 PM

According to the John Carson interview on DPR, everything we have seen till now is Hoya and it takes 18 months to develop a new system.

D600 looks great but I will be more interested to see what Pentax can do with that sensor. No rush for me.

normhead · 09-19-2012, 05:22 PM

I will have money for a new system soon... but I want to see how the Canon 6D stacks up against it. But.. probably 4 grand with a couple decent lenses, or buy the 31 Ltd, 77and DA 15ltd. The chart I saw said the 6D had better low light performance, 2 stops better, and more dynamic range... and it's less MP, easier on the computer. And I still have to decide whether the 645 should be a consideration..

**7samurai** · 09-19-2012, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor

If you want to understand them, they explain them in the About section. I also wrote this short overview here.

Laurentiu,

I following the link, but couldn't find the DXO document. The link took me to the top of your site.
Do you have a more direct link. Thank you for taking the time to educate me.

update: just found it using search

rawr · 09-19-2012, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by normhead

The chart I saw said the 6D had better low light performance, 2 stops better, and more dynamic range.

You must be mistaken.
There is simply no way the Canon will come close to the Nikon's scores. Just wait and see.

**Rondec** · 09-19-2012, 06:46 PM

Originally posted by einstrigger

^They've been dangling that carrot for far too long. A year? I haven't seen any official announcements about that. And so long as that's the case, the Pentax FF will just continue to be vaporware, as it's been for the past few years. Emphasis on the YEARS.

Well, honestly, if Pentax hadn't been taken over by hoya, there would have been a full frame Pentax long ago. Hoya decided it was too risky and scrapped all of the plans that they had been working on.

Who really knows what Ricoh is going to do yet? All we can say is that we have seen more releases and new announcements in the last nine months than in the previous year and a half.

pinholecam · 09-19-2012, 07:23 PM

Originally posted by illdefined

At the time I got into Pentax, FF cameras were all huge with integrated grips and prohibitively expensive. Pentax had a whole line of smaller DSLRs that were aggressively competitive with the big two at APS-C, with unique tiny primes, so I bought in. Since then Pentax has been relatively paralyzed on that front.

With mirrorless there are now smaller, faster cameras with similar image quality and even smaller, faster lenses. and with the big two DSLR makers, there are now considerable jumps in image quality with reasonable price and size.

Frankly I feel much of Pentax's R&D has been wasted on pet projects like the Q and K-01, and the 645 while good, also distracted them from bringing FF to the consumer.

Pentax had what I wanted when I bought in, with promise and position for more. and it never came. I certainly wouldn't have bought in now - it's a completely new reality that I'm not sure Pentax knows its place in.

And Pentax still has some of the smallest APS-C DSLRs and lenses.
You've got to define what you can really afford and need, perhaps how much you have in Pentax lenses and your patience in waiting (maybe indefinitely) too. No one can do it for you.
A DSLR from Pentax still handles better than any MILC.

Mirrorless may have gotton smaller, but not w/o compromises (eg. form factor; poor lenses for some; AF in some; smaller sensor for some).
DSLR's have slightly cheaper FF now, but they are still not cheap. In fact, they are a bit crippled (though I can live with that) and at prices that their former models were at (ie. 5DII; D700 prices as of now)
Anyone who would jump right away, could have done so too with the cheaper D700 or 5DII just a few months before now.
They are all still rather big BTW.

Wasted effort on the Q?
Certaily untrue.
It is well thought out, and adds unique capabilites to an enthusiasts DSLR system.
Too bad about initial price, feet dragging with the adapter though.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Order your d600 now! (aus)	bibz	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	15	02-09-2013 01:45 AM
D600 announced - $2099	deadwolfbones	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	316	11-23-2012 07:44 AM
Nikon D600	Fl_Gulfer	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	2	08-09-2012 02:31 PM
Anyone considering the Nikon Fx D600 if price is right?	Reportage	Pentax DSLR Discussion	50	07-25-2012 02:52 PM
Computers and benchmark obsessions?	larryinlc	General Talk	10	04-14-2011 06:10 AM

09-19-2012, 01:21 PM - 1 Like	#16
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Given that it has lower pixel density than the K-5, it doesn't score any better than one should expect from a new FF sensor - so no shock here. But at least we now know that the 24mp sensor is pretty good, and if the Pentax FF will use the same sensor, we can expect good performance.

09-19-2012, 01:29 PM - 1 Like	#17
civiletti Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 1,435	Originally posted by gazonk Given that it has lower pixel density than the K-5, it doesn't score any better than one should expect from a new FF sensor - so no shock here. But at least we now know that the 24mp sensor is pretty good, and if the Pentax FF will use the same sensor, we can expect good performance. What Pentax FF? By the time one emerges, Nikon will have the next generation available.

09-19-2012, 01:32 PM	#18
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by civiletti What Pentax FF? By the time one emerges, Nikon will have the next generation available. The one that they've now practically admitted that is coming in about a year. If Nikon already replaces the D600 (or D800) within a year, it would be a first, even for them.

09-19-2012, 01:48 PM	#19
einstrigger Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Sacramento, CA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 728	^They've been dangling that carrot for far too long. A year? I haven't seen any official announcements about that. And so long as that's the case, the Pentax FF will just continue to be vaporware, as it's been for the past few years. Emphasis on the YEARS.

09-19-2012, 02:10 PM - 2 Likes	#20
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	As I said somewhere else, it is worth noting that the D600's DxO numbers for dynamic range equal that of the K-5, the color-depth numbers are only 5% apart, and the low-light ISO numbers are only 1-1.5 stops different. Before everyone slashes their wrists about the D600's DxO score, FF, Pentax, etc, while the D600 is an impressive beast, the DxOMark score reveals that the differences between it and a fine camera like the K-5 aren't exactly night-and-day. If you don't shoot a lot of low-light and are happy with 16MP, the D600 is almost a big yawn for K-5 users.

09-19-2012, 03:51 PM - 1 Like	#21
7samurai Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 474	Originally posted by civiletti The D600 is quite impressive for a $2100 body. The K5IIs is $1300. Really amazing what $800 gets you: full frame, raw full HD video out, better flash system, better auto focus, longer warranties, better support from 3rd party lens makers.

09-19-2012, 04:01 PM	#22
7samurai Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 474	Originally posted by rawr As I said somewhere else, it is worth noting that the D600's DxO numbers for dynamic range equal that of the K-5, the color-depth numbers are only 5% apart, and the low-light ISO numbers are only 1-1.5 stops different. Before everyone slashes their wrists about the D600's DxO score, FF, Pentax, etc, while the D600 is an impressive beast, the DxOMark score reveals that the differences between it and a fine camera like the K-5 aren't exactly night-and-day. If you don't shoot a lot of low-light and are happy with 16MP, the D600 is almost a big yawn for K-5 users. To tell you the truth, I don't really understand the DXO scores. I just care about the images, type, and style of images I take. Looking forward to more real world images.

09-19-2012, 05:01 PM	#23
Laurentiu Cristofor Banned Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: WA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,055	Originally posted by 7samurai To tell you the truth, I don't really understand the DXO scores. If you want to understand them, they explain them in the About section. I also wrote this short overview here.

09-19-2012, 05:04 PM	#24
Sol Invictus Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Calgary, Alberta Photos: Gallery Posts: 392	Originally posted by 7samurai Really amazing what $800 gets you: full frame, raw full HD video out, better flash system, better auto focus, longer warranties, better support from 3rd party lens makers. Great point.

09-19-2012, 05:14 PM	#25
Deimos Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Kingdom of Wonder Posts: 1,777	According to the John Carson interview on DPR, everything we have seen till now is Hoya and it takes 18 months to develop a new system. D600 looks great but I will be more interested to see what Pentax can do with that sensor. No rush for me.

09-19-2012, 05:22 PM	#26
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I will have money for a new system soon... but I want to see how the Canon 6D stacks up against it. But.. probably 4 grand with a couple decent lenses, or buy the 31 Ltd, 77and DA 15ltd. The chart I saw said the 6D had better low light performance, 2 stops better, and more dynamic range... and it's less MP, easier on the computer. And I still have to decide whether the 645 should be a consideration..

09-19-2012, 05:39 PM	#27
7samurai Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 474	Originally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor If you want to understand them, they explain them in the About section. I also wrote this short overview here. Laurentiu, I following the link, but couldn't find the DXO document. The link took me to the top of your site. Do you have a more direct link. Thank you for taking the time to educate me. update: just found it using search

09-19-2012, 05:54 PM	#28
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by normhead The chart I saw said the 6D had better low light performance, 2 stops better, and more dynamic range. You must be mistaken. There is simply no way the Canon will come close to the Nikon's scores. Just wait and see.

09-19-2012, 06:46 PM	#29
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by einstrigger ^They've been dangling that carrot for far too long. A year? I haven't seen any official announcements about that. And so long as that's the case, the Pentax FF will just continue to be vaporware, as it's been for the past few years. Emphasis on the YEARS. Well, honestly, if Pentax hadn't been taken over by hoya, there would have been a full frame Pentax long ago. Hoya decided it was too risky and scrapped all of the plans that they had been working on. Who really knows what Ricoh is going to do yet? All we can say is that we have seen more releases and new announcements in the last nine months than in the previous year and a half.

09-19-2012, 07:23 PM	#30
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Originally posted by illdefined At the time I got into Pentax, FF cameras were all huge with integrated grips and prohibitively expensive. Pentax had a whole line of smaller DSLRs that were aggressively competitive with the big two at APS-C, with unique tiny primes, so I bought in. Since then Pentax has been relatively paralyzed on that front. With mirrorless there are now smaller, faster cameras with similar image quality and even smaller, faster lenses. and with the big two DSLR makers, there are now considerable jumps in image quality with reasonable price and size. Frankly I feel much of Pentax's R&D has been wasted on pet projects like the Q and K-01, and the 645 while good, also distracted them from bringing FF to the consumer. Pentax had what I wanted when I bought in, with promise and position for more. and it never came. I certainly wouldn't have bought in now - it's a completely new reality that I'm not sure Pentax knows its place in. And Pentax still has some of the smallest APS-C DSLRs and lenses. You've got to define what you can really afford and need, perhaps how much you have in Pentax lenses and your patience in waiting (maybe indefinitely) too. No one can do it for you. A DSLR from Pentax still handles better than any MILC. Mirrorless may have gotton smaller, but not w/o compromises (eg. form factor; poor lenses for some; AF in some; smaller sensor for some). DSLR's have slightly cheaper FF now, but they are still not cheap. In fact, they are a bit crippled (though I can live with that) and at prices that their former models were at (ie. 5DII; D700 prices as of now) Anyone who would jump right away, could have done so too with the cheaper D700 or 5DII just a few months before now. They are all still rather big BTW. Wasted effort on the Q? Certaily untrue. It is well thought out, and adds unique capabilites to an enthusiasts DSLR system. Too bad about initial price, feet dragging with the adapter though.