Talk:Nikon D600

Vanity fair
Posting an empty article only to be "the first" wasn't a bright idea. It's only rumors that D600 will be full-frame. And it will DEFINITELY NOT be "professional". Nikon has two pro cameras - D800 and D4 - and that's the way it's going to be. But whatever happens, the truth will not be known until Autumn. I believe the technical details were taken from D800. I think this article should go down. HARD! BadaBoom (talk) 19:23, 15 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Here are the first leaked images. I am fully convinced about its authenticity. -- Jovian Eye storm 02:39, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, you can speculate all you want on that page. This is NOT a forum. This article violates WP:OR and WP:NOT. And what the editor did to the Nikon DSLR timeline table is pure and simple vandalism.
 * And I'd like to hear some explanation from the admin who removed the speedy deletion tag. The article meets the criteria. BadaBoom (talk) 13:51, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

It wasn't eligible for speedy deletion as "no content", as it had content in the infobox. But WP:CRYSTAL says: "Wikipedia is not a collection of product announcements and rumors. While Wikipedia includes up-to-date knowledge about newly revealed products, short articles that consist only of product announcement information are not appropriate. Until such time that more encyclopedic knowledge about the product can be verified, product announcements should be merged to a larger topic (such as an article about the creator(s), a series of products, or a previous product) if applicable. Speculation and rumor, even from reliable sources, are not appropriate encyclopedic content.". So I have redirected this article to Nikon. If/when you have a Reliable source for the existence, rather than the rumour, of this forthcoming camera, then re-create this article. Pam D  21:29, 18 June 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:CRYSTAL!!! How could I forget! Thanks, PamD. I've also taken the liberty of removing D600 from the timeline template. BadaBoom (talk) 09:02, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Pro <> Consumer
Noticed that in the timeline the D600 is listed as being part of Nikons Professional line-up, but Nikon puts it as part of their consumer line-up. Should the timeline not be revised to reflect that? See the Nikon UK site as reference: Nikon.co.uk product overview Martineriksen (talk) 11:21, 9 February 2013 (UTC)


 * There are already new templates in preparation, in which the D600 is no pro, see the template talk. And:


 * 1) Wikipedia prefers third-party sources. Wikipedia must NOT speak to the mouth of a manufacturer
 * 2) The timeline is NO classification template, but a navigation template roughly ordered by classes and time.
 * 3) "Professional": Nikon has its famous Nikon Professional Services : Nikon decided that the D600 should be (for whatever reason) no part of it.NPS requirement Tagremover (talk) 18:40, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Improved weathersealing
The D610 is weathersealed to exactly the same level as the D600 (D800 degree). Removed the sentence and source stating the D610 has improved weathersealing. Sources: D600 product page D610 Announcement — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.249.129.137 (talk) 20:07, 17 February 2014 (UTC)