Nikon D610: Informal Review with Comparisons to Nikon D800

Article by: Denni Raubenheimer

Photos by: Denni Raubenheimer and Yolande Raubenheimer

 

The Nikon D610 is the relatively new “entry-level” full-frame from Nikon. Its pricing makes it an attractive option to those wanting to enter the world of digital full-frame and also a likely choice for serious amateurs and professionals looking for a second, or third, full-frame body. Reviews of this acclaimed model are abundant. However, here I give my impressions of the camera and compare it to the awesome non-flagship Nikon D800. Many wanting to purchase an “affordable”  Nikon full-frame will have to choose between the D610 and D800. I hope this article will help such readers to come to sensible final choices.  

Butterfly taken heldheld with single AF-point and C-AF. Nikon D610, 1/400s, 280mm, f/8, ISO-500.

Technical background:

To give some context to readers that are not familiar with Nikon’s latest full-frame bodies. The D610 was released quite shortly after the D600. The sensor and image quality of these two models are the same and the specs are near identical. A noteworthy improvement in the D610 is an upgraded auto white balance system. Unofficial as it might be, the main reason that the D610 was produced so quickly after the D600 is arguably that it resolves the problematic tendency of the D600’s shutter-mechanism to expel micro droplets of oil onto the camera’s image sensor. Nevertheless, the D610 and D600 are Nikon’s most affordable full-frame D-SLRs retailing for around 1800 USD and 1500 USD, respectively (body-only). The Nikon D800 (and D800E) is one rung up the ladder (the camera that pioneered 36 Mega-pixels in the full-frame arena; a highly acclaimed and ground-breaking model) costing about 2600 USD (3000 USD for the D800E; body-only). The next rung of the ladder is that of the flagship D4 and D4s that retail for roughly 5000 USD and 6500 USD, respectively (body only). These flagship models are arguably only suited for successful professionals and the significantly wealthy, but offer unbeatable image quality and autofocus performance (though those with a preference to Canon would probably argue that Canon’s flagship 1D X outguns the Nikon flagship).

Very recently, the D750 and D810 were launched. The former lies in between the D610 and D800 and the latter is the successor of the D800. The D750 makes choosing the best “affordable” Nikon full-frame a more difficult choice. Comparisons to the D710 are not included in this article.

Specifications:

Here are the core specifications of the D610:

- 24 million effective pixels

- 6016 x 4016 maximum resolution (3:2 ration)

- Sensor size and type: full-frame CMOS

- Processor: Expeed 3

- ISO: 100 – 6400 (Boosted: 50 – 25600)

- File formats: NEF (RAW) 12 – 14 bit (lossless compressed/compressed/uncompressed) and Jpeg (fine/normal/basic)

- Regular Nikon Autofocus types with addition of face detect AF.

- Focus points: 39 (9 cross-type)

- Shutter speed range: 30s. – 1/4000s.

- Shooting modes: P, A, S and M.

- Flash X sync speed: 1/200s.

- Max frame rate: 6 frames per second

- Buffer in RAW: 14 frames at lossless 14-bit RAW format.

- Drive modes: single, continuous low, continuous high, mirror-up, quite shutter release, timer

- Metering modes: Multi (matrix), Centre-weighted, Average and Spot.

- Exposure compensation range: ± 5 stops

- AE bracketing:

- WB bracketing:

- Storage: 2x SD slots

- Remote control: wired and wireless

- Body Material: Magnesium alloy and on top and behind with polycarbonate front.

- Environmental sealing: Water and dust resistant

- Weight with battery: 850g.

- Dimensions: 141 x 113 x 82 mm

- Video resolutions: 1920x1080 (30/25/24 fps) and 1280x720 (60/50/30/25 fps)

- Video format: MPEG-4, H.264

- Microphone and speaker are mono.

- Timelapse capable: Yes

--- Specs obtained from www.dpreview.com

Red-knobbed Coots. Nikon D610, 1/1600s, 420mm, f/7.1, ISO-720.

Nikon D610 specs vs. Nikon D800

The most noteworthy areas where these fall short of the higher-end Nikon D800 are the maximum shutter speed (1/4000s. vs. 1/8000s.), the amount of focus points (39 points vs. 51 points), flash X-sync speed (1/200s. vs. 1/250s.), body material (Magnesium alloy on top and behind with polycarbonate front vs. complete magnesium alloy skeleton) and resolution (24MP vs. 36MP). In terms of resolution the “deficit” of the D610 is only really relevant to photographers that require the utmost detail in their images and have an arsenal of lenses with extremely good resolution and to those that often need to crop their photos significantly (though at high ISOs extreme cropping with the D800 is generally not feasible for retaining good image quality). Lastly, the D610 outguns the D800 in maximum frame rate, namely 6 fps vs. 4 fps, but has a smaller buffer (14 vs. 20 frames at max frame rate and 14-bit compressed RAW).

For videographers that can afford the D800 the choice between the two is a no-brainer, with the D800 being a professionally competent video D-SLR camera. For those who might only on occasion need high quality video, the D610 is good enough. 

Nikon D610, hand-held, 1/250s, 50mm, f/3.2, ISO-1250.

100% crop of above photo after resizing to 16MP. Note ISO of 1250.

First impressions:

The very first impressions that I had of the D600 were of briefly handling clients’ cameras. I liked the feel and somewhat liked the smaller size (I have large hands). The playback from a few images suggested very similar to near identical image quality to that of our D800. I could see that the autofocus area was slightly smaller than that of the D800, but also that for wildlife application it would generally be large enough. The most noteworthy difference that I spotted on the D600’s body was the lack of a designated AF-ON button. After these first brief interactions with the D600 I felt sure that had we gone for the D600, in stead of the D800, we would still have had a more than adequate primary body for our wildlife and general purposes.

After receiving the test unit that we had for two weeks it didn’t take me long to configure it to our preferences. Something that Nikon’s recent pro bodies allow is exposure compensation via Auto ISO in Manual mode. This is an extremely versatile shooting mode set-up, so that’s what I used for most of the shooting I did with the test unit. After shooting a few images I could notice that the D610 sample did have noticeably longer lag in between shots compared to the D800. This is probably the only significant criticism I have of the D610 vs. the D800. Apart from the time lag (that I quite quickly became unconscious of) shooting with the D610 was very enjoyable and I never felt unconfident in the camera’s abilities. 

Handheld image at ISO-3200 with no NR. Click on image to see cropped window at 100% after resizing to 16MP..

Performance:

The D610 performs like a true pro-grade body. White balance and focus are very dependable and hard to distinguish from the D800. While shooting birds in flight I did get the impression the D610’s focus tracking was slightly inferior to the D800. However, the D610 largely made up for this with its quicker frame rate and thus it seemed that the amount of critically sharp photos were similar to what I would have expected to produce using the D800.

The size of the AF point array on the D610 has been critisized quite a bit, because it is somewhat smaller that that on the D800 and D4. For me personally, the area covered by the D610 would be sufficient to shoot most of the action-shots that I tend to try and capture. Only with birds in flight smaller than pigeons would I wish for a larger array.

In general, when depth of field becomes very narrow in non-action situations it advisable to move one’s single Autofocus point as near as possible to where you want the focus to lie in your final composition (i.e. compose first and then move the AF point to where you need to focus), even though almost all D-SLR models’ central AF points are most accurate, because one can easily significantly move a narrow focus-field during re-framing. Here the D610’s somewhat smaller AF point array also falls short of the D800 (and D4). However, the left- and right most AF–points do actually still lie outside the image frame’s vertical thirds.  Unfortunately, the top and bottom Af-points that lie away from the central AF-cluster do not reach the upper and lower thirds of the camera’s image frame. If you wanted to place your focus exactly on the intersection of two thirds one would still have to reframe slightly upwards, or downwards, after using the nearest AF-point.

While using our test unit I did often use single AF-points away from the centre of the frame and never noticed unreliable zones.

ISO performance on the D610 was very much what I expected – near identical to D800 images after down-sampling to 24MP. This says a lot, because if you then downsample high ISO D610 files to 16MP you end up with ISO performance that negligibly falls short of that of the Nikon D4! 

Little Egret in flight. Nikon D610, 1/2500s, 420mm, f/6.3, ISO-280.

100% crop of above image.

Concluding comparisons and final thoughts:

In terms of image quality the D610 and D800 are near identical for full screen viewing and A4 prints. The photo-file advantage of the D800 is in its groundbreaking resolution and capacity for large prints and significant image cropping at low to moderate ISOs. However, for most people 24 MP is more than sufficient. The D610 will also have less of a load on your file storage space and computer’s RAM.

Choosing a D800 over a D610 is not going to give any ISO advantages.

The D800 does arguably have a significantly better AF system than the D610. This is slightly compensated for by the 50% faster max frame rate of the D610 (6 fps) compared to that of the D800 (4 fps). However, this “compensation” is sort of nullified by the smaller buffer of the D610, which will always fill quicker than with the D800 using comparable RAW formats.

Ergonomically, the D610 handles well. The lack of a designated AF-ON button (which the D800 has) means that one has to assign the AE-L/AF-L button to AF-ON if you wish to configure the camera to back-focus only. This then means that you temporarily lose an AE-L button and then have to “sacrifice” another pragrammable button, like the Fn button, to AE-L if you need the function.

Personally, I am glad that we have the D800. For us it is worth the extra money. However, at the time we were able to afford it. Furthermore, we had gone for the D610 I strongly doubt our portfolios would have suffered noticibly and maybe not at all.

If you can not responsibly afford the D800, but can afford the D610 – then you can confidently go for the D610 – its abilities are completely professional and its image quality is awesome. If you can afford the D800, but would prefer to have money to spare for camera optics – the D610 is more-than just competent.  

Down-sampled image with moderate NR. Nikon D610, 25s, 24mm, f/2.8, ISO-6400.

Nikon D610, 3s, 24mm, f/13, ISO-500.

Nikon D610, 1/500s, 44mm, f/2.8, ISO-3200.

 

100% crop of above image without NR after resizing to 16 MP at ISO-3200.

Slightly unstable tripod used for this image. Nikon D610, 1/400s, 420mm, f/9, ISO-400.