Didn't want to hijack the other thread and I guess I'm asking Neil but I'm willing to hear from anyone who has used both.
I know it depends on what you shoot and any existing glass and budgets you may have but for this discussion please lets not consider this. I've been trying to decide for 2 months now and am really having trouble. In brief here is where I'm at so far:
D600 is FF so better ISO performance and all-round quality of image but its features have been 'dumbed down' so as not to compete with D800. Then there is the oil spots issue.
D7100 is APSC but much closer in features to my current D300
D600 if image quality is worth paying more than getting the normal bells and whistles. They appear to be comparable until the area where the benefits of FF takeover, namely IQ and ISO performance. Of course it also costs $800 more too.
Of the two cameras, if I were just buying one, and upgrading, I'd go for the D7100.
Unless you absolutely need the best ISO for low light.
Why D7100?
- Smaller, less expensive lenses
- No low pass filter
- Weather sealing like the D800
- Lighter
- Better autofocusing system
- 1.3x Mode better for tracking (almost the whole viewfinder is covered by focus points)
- No oil splatter problem as far as I know like the D600
- Significantly less expensive...pays for the upgrade to the D7200 in a year or so!
Why D600?
- Bigger, brighter viewfinder
- 1.5 stop advantage in low light noise
- If you already own very good FX lenses and want to use regular focal lengths (not multiplier)
For portraits and for high ISO shoots I can only use my D600 - quality is sooo much better, images are more tridimensional and bokeh is stunning.
D7100 is a great improvement of D7000 high ISO performances (and D7000 was good to be an APS-C sensor camera), but doesn't reach the levels of a full frame.
When I take a landscape shot at ISO100 difference is not so big (I'd say, barely visible)
