Already at the first release of the D610 is a substantial difference to D800 is clearly audible. While the D800 with a metallic hard shutter sound is relatively loud, the D610 will trigger gently and quietly. A huge acoustic difference!
The body of the D610 is high-quality and robust (mainly magnesium / aluminum alloy). The top level of the D800 does not reach them, but it looks. For the D610 with 850g (body with battery) felt (approximately 150g) is lighter than the D800. It is in terms of size even more compact and is excellent in hand. Compared to the Nikon DX models the housing is definitely higher quality.
The design of the D610 comes - just like that of the D800 (and actually almost all Nikon semiprofessional and professional DSLRs since 1980) - the renowned Italian design studio Italdesign (Giorgetto Giugiaro) from Turin. Italdesign is actually mainly automotive designers and has drawn in addition to numerous design icons and the VW Golf I (1974). Today Italdesign one of 90% on Lamborghini to VW Group. I find the design of the D610 with its continuous lines, both aesthetically and functionally successful.
The optical viewfinder of the D610 is a true piece of cake and is made of a high-quality pentaprism glass that is as large and bright as in the D800. The viewfinder is certainly the best of what is currently offered by the market. The Nikon professional models (from the D800) all have a circular eyepiece, while the D610 still has a rectangular eyepiece. For me, this round eyepiece has advantages when viewing. Therefore, I have my D610 rebuilt accordingly. For this, Nikon offers the round eyecup DK-3, which will together with the eyepiece mounted (by square to circular) DK-22 and the Okularschutzglas FM2 / FE2 on the D610 can.
The LCD monitor is relatively large (3.2 inches) and very high resolution. Larger displays are not currently built into cameras. The monitor is not foldable, which is constructionally but for me more of an advantage (higher stability).
Contrary to the D800, the D610 has an explicit mode dial for exposure control. In addition to the P, S, A, M, the D610 has (which provide in practice far better results, than is generally assumed) also fully automatic and 19 scene modes. In addition, are also two practical custom exposure modes to choose from, you can program yourself. The D610 has - in contrast to the D800 - on the front and back of the camera IR sensors with which the IR remote release ML-L3 can be triggered wirelessly.
In my view, for the D610 particularly bright (and expensive) 2.8 professional lenses he is not absolutely necessary in order to obtain good image quality. These are not only very expensive but also large and heavy. I use a standard zoom AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 4.0 G ED VR, a telephoto zoom, the AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm 4.5-5.6 G IF-ED VR, a wide-angle lens, the AF-S Nikkor 18-35 mm 3.5-4.5 G ED and as a prime lens, the AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8 G. These lenses are still relatively inexpensive and also relatively light and compact and therefore fit to travel.
The 24.3 MP image sensor of the D610 provides an excellent balance between high resolution and reasonable file size (12MB per photo in JPEG Fine). The sensor comes from Sony and Nikon will probably only slightly optimized (including the 36 MP sensor of the D800 is supposed to come from Sony). Sony uses this sensor also in its own high-end models. To my knowledge, is the main difference between the 24 MP and 36 MP sensor in the size of the pixels. When D610 are somewhat greater than at the D800 of 4.9 microns with 5.95 microns. Accordingly, the D610 has a larger (aperture value) beneficial aperture (f / 9.8) than the D800 (f / 8) and less diffraction losses when stopping down. That is, you can / must stop down a little stronger in the D610 than the D800, to obtain the optimum focus. The high-ISO capabilities of the D610 are - in spite of the larger pixels - in my view, significantly better than the D800. Overall, I would image the results that can be achieved with two cameras, not deem so different than that, this would be feel great as an amateur photographer. But this is only my subjective opinion. What image quality significantly benefit, is the size of the FX sensor. With approximately 36 x 24 mm it has the area of 864 mm². He is so handsome 2.3 times as large as a DX sensor with dimensions of approximately 24 x 16 mm (area 370 mm²). These values are important if one wants to illustrate critically whether really can deliver useful results only the best lenses for D610 (or even a D800). Downscaled to the DX format has the D610 namely a resolution of 10.3 MP (the D800 15.4 MP). However, all current Nikon DX DSLRs already own a 24 MP sensor and thus a much higher pixel density. I am therefore of the opinion that the requirements for the lenses in the D610 are not higher, than that of a current DX camera. Of course, one is with a higher quality optics can always also take better photos, but absolutely necessary for I consider this not with the D610. As there is currently no single DSLR's with a higher resolution sensor even with Canon and Nikon also the top model D4 "only" 16 MP dissolves, already, the question arises whether the 36 MP sensor of the D800 delivers real quality photos than the 24 MP sensor of the D610. After my (six-week) experience with the D800 I can negate that question clearly. However, the D800 offers unique opportunities for enlargements. At this potential the D610 does not quite measure up. In sum, however, the image quality of the D610 is excellent and the photos offer much potential for magnifying very large format prints. In addition, the D610 is (especially much faster than the D800) both in image processing as well as the continuous shooting speed is very fast.
In tests, the AF module of the D610 is criticized with its 39 rather close-set focus points on several occasions. Criticized insofar as the focal points are located very centrally and therefore do not cover a significant part of the frame. In practice, the AF of the D610 but works well - both in terms of precision and speed. Even with the 39 AF points can be very good pictures (the D800 has 51 AF points). As a rule, the subject is in the AF points and is - as this very engstehen - covered by these also excellent. A further point of criticism at the D610, the fastest shutter speed of "only" 1 / 4,000 sec. Is easily bearable. A faster shutter speed (such as 1 / 8,000 in D800) is required almost never done in practice. Even a Leica S for over 18,000 EUR has "only" 1 / 4,000 sec. And no one perceives this as a limitation. What could have been ergonomically can solve better, the arrangement of the stop-down button and the Fn button (eg for the display of the electronic level). Especially the use of the Fn key is used to with the index finger on the trigger. The arrangement with the D800 is here better managed.
Video functionality I do not use.
I have to make decisions. Before purchasing the D610 still the direct competition in full frame, the Canon EOS 6D viewed, This has the considerably worse autofocus with only 11 AF points, of which only one cross-type sensor. The monitor of the Canon 6D is also slightly smaller (3.0 inches instead of 3.2 inches in the D610) and the optical viewfinder shows not 100%, but only 97%. The fastest shutter speed is 1 / 4,000 sec. Same. The image sensor of the Canon resolves with 20 MP to slightly lower and has a total of my opinion, a slightly inferior image quality (if you can detect differences at this high level in practice yet). For this, the high-ISO capabilities of Canon 6D are probably slightly better than the D610.
In total, the D610 judgment of me gets quite clear 5 star. It is in the amateur field probably currently the best full frame DSLR and offers good value for money. I photograph a lot and often with this uncomplicated camera that makes her a lot of fun by the operator and the handling. It is my opinion, in particular for all the amateur photographers the right full-frame DSLR, who do not want to pay the last 10% of quality at twice the price (incl. Follow-up costs for expensive and heavy professional lenses) and twice the weight of equipment.
