For an attractive price I bought in November 2013. D610 at a regional photo shop and, surprise !, the first D610 had a systematic backfocus with all my lenses. Exchange, second copy akzetpabel, minimal deviations. I thought Nikon would have eradicated the D610 now all known issues from prior production. Apart from the focus adjustment, it would seem. From the Thai production comes apparently not optimally consistent product quality. One may for keeping picky, but my point is that a camera of at least about 2000 List Price bitteschön should be provided with a sedentary to the point autofocus also, otherwise the 24 megapixel chip can not great apart from the swarms of high-resolution smartphone Knips crates to put it bluntly.
The first images compared D610 D7100 brought two eye-openers:
1) in direct comparison, that same perspective, the same depth of field, etc. The D610 image is vivid and better durchzeichnet appears sharper. This has so far surprised me as both cameras feature 24 MP sensor resolution and the D7100 has the advantage of the lack of AA filter on its side. The D610 delivers right away with default settings already at least as sharp image; I turn diegleichen optimizations to occur as in D7100 and D7000 in the D610 compared significantly better results. Also, the Tamron 24-70 VC delivers, quite contrary to the fear on the D610 noticeably better results than before to D7100.
2) although in the actually better AF module (D4) was installed D7100 which provides with sniff received Multi-Cam 4800 the D610 with its fairly centrally seated AF sensor fields in dim light, the better accuracy! For me this was an equally blatant as pleasant surprise, because the D610 should serve me primarily for interiors and difficult light. Well, they ruled, and my test shots with the tried and true method "focusing with central sensor and swing on image area" showed no significant differences in sharpness Tamron and 35 and 85-Nikkor.
The first interior photo shoot with models I was painfully out just how thin the actual depth of field at full frame is yet - two people have to be positioned at an aperture 4 in a plane otherwise we see already that only a critical focus of both. With DX cameras is not so serious and my feeling for the sharpness zone falls in DX also not so steeply from disarming. This much is clear: full frame is plastic, requires sufficient depth of field as well as a smaller aperture DX and therefore more flash power of the flash unit! My Ranger Quadra are with 400 joules anyway no miracle power so that each aperture stop is one; I'll have to think very carefully in future which camera is which picture to choose the topic. I also fell unpleasantly on how easily even at 1/200 shutter speed motion blur is captured. As DX customers I had not taken never had problems with the slow deflagrating Elinchrom Quadra S-heads or Jinbei China flashes and the reports on the network very seriously, which recommend fast for sharp images A flash heads. With FX that has changed in appearance and I will soon try it indoors the A-head. I'm pretty sure, is that there is a difference.
In a nutshell: In the "Photo Studio" and in macro shooting DX can score with system-related advantages, such as through the broader focus. By contrast, the D610 scores always with the "crisper" picture impression. For me it is clear, I drive two tracks and used depending on the task DX or FX, since both complement each other.
What I did not like so much of the D610 is the viewfinder. I feel no difference to the viewfinder of the D7100. The viewfinder of the D800, however, is a revelation, especially for eyeglass wearers.
Neither I like the castrated sync speed of 1/200 and 1/4000 the shortest time that can better the D7100.
Correct annoying it is but the layout and functions of the back buttons - the OK button calls when playing inconveniently the Bilbearbeitungsmenu on instead to zoom to 100% -Schnellansicht as with D7100 and D800, and is not configurable, the zoom buttons are again as in the D7000 attached but reversed in function - Why the Nikon designers are not really in a position to even assign these buttons much used a fixed place so that one can grope intuitively as a photographer? Three DSLR, three buttons layouts; right they manage to remain uniform, the left is reorganized diligently. Annoying.
Overall, I'm quite happy with the D610. The files are not too large, the image quality is very satisfactory, Wide Wide is now back and the image quality losses to the corners are not as flashy as feared. For telephoto photography, I naturally take still prefer the DX cameras but for interiors and problematic light FX is basically better.
An observation of the trial period, I want to follow up on: the Q-mode is not much quieter than normal, the mirror blow but much less violent and that leads me to a lesser Committee for the Freehand exposure times which are generally regarded as critical. Example: 1 / 30s with 35mm optics is in Q mode critically sharp, mostly mild verzittert in S mode. Just try, it helps me and the acoustics of the Q I find enjoyable. Folds of course not if it has to happen quickly.
Given the D800 and D600 associated with quality problems I've been waiting specifically for something like the D610 and do not regret the purchase. By January 2014 the price is also anglangt Amazon to attractive levels. Because here agree the relationship between price, quality and bid photographic performance I see every reason for five points.
