Nikon Df General Discussion

PB_PM

Just the same old green dot that all other Nikon bodies use, according to those who have got their hands on samples.

Symphotic

Just the same old green dot that all other Nikon bodies use, according to those who have got their hands on samples.

So it's not really manual/optical focus, but electronic assist manual focus. It would have been slick if they had a microprism ring in the viewfinder...

PB_PM

The Df uses the same screen as the D610, so I'm not sure why anyone would think it had a split prism.

KnockKnock

This is good clean fun. If I had a Df, I would walk around with an 85mm f/1.8 and carry say the 28mm f/1.8. The 85 would be great at picking out subjects (DoF isolation) and good for catching subjects from an obscure distance. Even might suffice as a marginal telephoto.

The 28 would remain in the bag (good idea with the belt pouch turned to the front). I find that I'm rarely in a hurry to put on a wide angle lens. I'm always in a hurry to put on a telephoto. Mostly because wide angles for me are more establishing shots that I can plan.

I know that's not the classic street shooting preference of 35mm. It may just be me, but my 35mm shots often look like mere snapshots, where my (shifting to DX talk now) 50mm f/1.4 seems to create the majority of my artsy shots.

moreorless

Looking at the control system one thing I think Nikon should really offer (or add via firmware if they haven't) is is the ability to use the dials to set your auto ISO/Shutterspeed.

Shooting mostly landscapes I'm not a big user of this function so I might have missed something but at present the max auto ISO and preffered shutterspeed can only be set via the menu or with ISO via pressing the button on the left can't they? having the ability to both control and to view these settings from above whilst controlling aperture and ISO with the front/rear dials as normal seems like it would make this function more responsive.

Indeed I'd argue that this method of control might actually be desired by more people than putting in the standard settings via the top plate dials.

Vipmediastar_JZ

@knockknock i feel the same about 35 and 85. That is what i carry with me in my daily bag. Im mostly doing architecture right now but I prefer the 85 for the crop and reach.
I know this would be a great camera for me but i wont get it. 1/8000 with f1.8 and f1.4 helps alot for daytime shots thats not my dealbreak but rather the price. I was ok with the d600 because of price and I settled for 1/4000 and 1/200 flash sync.
I was really excited with the teaser videos and I like the look of the camera. Maybe ill visit a local shop to see if they have one just to play with.

TaoTeJared

I would really like to see the 2.8s get renewed/updated and this camera helps do that. I want Pancakes!!!

I'm personally not liking the "big" primes or how large prime lenses are becoming. I get wanting 1.4s, but for street shooting, smaller is better. For my taste the 28mm 1.8 is too large for street stuff.

Golf007sd

A very thought provoking perspective on the Nikon Df...bravo Romanas.

Is Camera Design Important.

Symphotic

I visited my local camera shop today and they've got 6 on order. Originally nobody wanted one, but now he's got buyers for them all.
I'm still probably going to wait until I can hold one.

kyoshinikon

No, I hate the Df because it has an underpowered AF and a sensor that limits the size of your prints to essentially smallish posters.

Then you sir have missed the point. Ive sold cropped pictures from a D80 printed at 40"x60" for more than 1K... Technical perfection is not what this cameras 1st goal is. This is not a tool for the efficient pixel peeper, nikon has too many of those on the market. What is under the hood reflects the design. Simple...

PB_PM

Just as there is no reason to sit around complaining about something you have no direct control over.

Seriously, the Df is what is, get over it.

Golf007sd

@PitchBlack: Buddy, I know you are not in favor of Df, but the point the author was trying to make goes beyond the Df itself. Romanas was looking at things from the outside in; hence his comparison of a type writer to a modern computer. It does & does not have anything to do about functionality, performance and the like. It is about the end user inner experience of why one would use the Df or device that fall within the same realm.

snakebunk

I think the problem with the Df is that it is only old technique. They should have made it mirrorless or something to make it interesting. Or put in a lot more value for the money. My guess is that it will fade away into history pretty fast.

Talking about soul, I don't think retro styled hip cameras is the place to look, even though the Df camera is a good looking piece of design.

Beso

There is no reason why any camera can't be as good as it can possibly be. There is no reason why design and state of the art have to be mutually exclusive. I've missed no point.

While I would like to believe this, I don't. There are all kinds of reasons but most begin and end with financial viability. People who are serious about photography and image quality want their gear to be very, very good. Unfortunately those who post 350,000,000 pics per day on Facebook are not generally interested in real photography. But that is exactly why the smartphone market is driving much of the consumer camera market. The masses like convenience, pocketable size, failsafe P&S, and easy upload.
Nikon and others are clearly struggling and will need to change their business model/strategy to survive; either as a growing imaging/optics company or a more exclusive niche company (which the stockholders would no doubt loathe).

TaoTeJared

No, I hate the Df because it has an underpowered AF and a sensor that limits the size of your prints to essentially smallish posters. I hate it because I really wanted it to be great and it has utterly disappointed me. I hate how it's being marketed as something transcendent, a gift from the glorious photography Gods...

Marketed as transcendent? Sorry but I don't see that at all. If not anything it is marketed directly at the physical human experience. The look, the feel, the physical turning of dials - that is completely opposite of transcendent. I sure haven't seen any marketing about a "gift from gods" either. Out of any rumors, even any speculation by the most novice, was the specs of this camera going to be anything more than what it is. The only thing it is lacking is video, a huge MP sensor (that I never read anyone wanting that) and the highest end AF system, that isn't all that different. You are creating this in your head. I'm sorry PB but the only thing that the DF has done is put a mirror up so you could see your own self disillusionment. You thought that this would be a full D4 but retro and a 36mp sensor and for $1,500? That is absolutely ridiculous.

TaoTeJared

A very thought provoking perspective on the Nikon Df...bravo Romanas.

Is Camera Design Important.

Although it was another one of Romanas's wondering posts that reads like a run away analogy trains that lacks direction for three quarters of it (kind of why I like reading him) I get his point. The abyss that creativity falls into can be quite deep and boring at the bottom and we just stroll along shooting the same way, same style, same light, same, same, boring, boring, blah and blah. Sparking that sometimes takes looking at images, and sometimes getting new tools including cameras. Just the process of shooting my rangefinders get's me looking at things different, change of focus, and that really has carried on with my X100. It seems all the creative juices start flowing when new systems come out and people push the envelope with them or just the renewed enjoyment have having something new gets you to shoot. I have seen people drop $2k on mirrorless systems left and right, $1,000s on old MF lenses, hundreds on training sites, thousands on various "actions" templates, $2 app after $2 app for their phone, bags, lenses, lighting, books...the list goes on. For $3k and a camera that will still beat out the high iso IQ mirrorless and DX systems for probably the next 5 years? If shooting in that style works, why not?

spraynpray

On another thread I posted that the plastics on the D600/610 and D7100 feel like Canons that I have handled to me - cheap and nasty - and I went on to say that they (Nikon) need to stop that nonsense. I hope and expect that the feel of the DF will be very high-end and give the user that feeling of having something special in his/her hands that rewards one greatly although subtly. I can see the DF being used by the Sunday shooters in a social setting - out walking with family and or friends, wearing their current fashion clothes and haircuts for example. I expect the DF will sell nicely to those who want to look good while doing the corny 'taking pictures' thing as well as to those with deep enough pockets to spend $3k on nostalgia.

I wish Nikon every success with it and hope the DF bashing does not affect sales too much.

Some people seem to think that by slagging off something good, it makes them look clever or discerning. Spotty D600 bashing is one thing but this wanton DF bashing is having is making some look silly.

Msmoto

What I would really like, a back with a D4 sensor, mounted so I can stick it on my F bodies from the 1960's. The metering, etc. could be worked out with an optical unit sticking out from the top. Each time one re-cocked the shutter, the meter would come on for a few minutes.

I would have an ev read out and set everything manually, ISO, Shutter, aperture. If this were possible, it would be worth $1,000 for me and this would IMO be "pure photography".

I just like the feel of winding the film, clicking the shutter, and the sound….yeah...

donaldejose

Yes, Msmoto: A digital back which could be put on old film cameras would be a really innovative product if one could be produced in the space available inside an old film Nikon. It could be thicker like some of the old data backs.

It should be easy for Nikon to put any of its three FX sensors into any of its bodies. Nikon could give us a choice of a 24 mp Df, a 36mp Df and a 16mp Df at different price points. Maybe some day they will do so instead of dedicating one sensor to one body design.

SquamishPhoto

No, I hate the Df because it has an underpowered AF and a sensor that limits the size of your prints to essentially smallish posters. I hate it because I really wanted it to be great and it has utterly disappointed me. I hate how it's being marketed as something transcendent, a gift from the glorious photography Gods...

Marketed as transcendent? Sorry but I don't see that at all. If not anything it is marketed directly at the physical human experience. The look, the feel, the physical turning of dials - that is completely opposite of transcendent. I sure haven't seen any marketing about a "gift from gods" either. Out of any rumors, even any speculation by the most novice, was the specs of this camera going to be anything more than what it is. The only thing it is lacking is video, a huge MP sensor (that I never read anyone wanting that) and the highest end AF system, that isn't all that different. You are creating this in your head. I'm sorry PB but the only thing that the DF has done is put a mirror up so you could see your own self disillusionment. You thought that this would be a full D4 but retro and a 36mp sensor and for $1,500? That is absolutely ridiculous.

Someone needs to get more cozy with their dictionary as you have quite clearly misunderstood the meaning of the term transcendent. Try again.

Vipmediastar_JZ

@msmoto You might just get your digital back

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/12/17/nikon-patents-a-digital-back-for-35mm-film-slr-cameras.aspx/

heartyfisher

LOL! did i get censored ?

rbrylawski

Thanks to all of you who know so much more than me. I mean that sincerely. And I have enjoyed reading this thread and find the pro and angst interesting when it comes to the DF. I do hope it sells well. But I have to wonder if people would have the same view if Nikon had introduced a modern looking camera, maybe a D620, with the innards of the DF, but included video for the price of the DF? For me, I've grown so accustomed to modern camera ergonomics, that I just don't have a desire to go back in time to designs of the past. And while the link above about a camera making us look at photography differently (paraphrased of course for brevity), do we really need a camera redesign to change our perspective on how to take a picture? Isn't the camera the tool? And the mind that determines how to capture an image. Or am I just missing something altogether?

tc88

It is about the end user inner experience of why one would use the Df or device that fall within the same realm.

Yes, if one enjoys the sound of typerwritters and don't care about the typos and has no problems wasting time retyping things, then sure. But if one cares about the end results and wants to be not bogged down by the typos and also the capability to revise, there is no doubt in my mind that computers will be preferred.

And regarding all those "mood" stuff, to put it nicely, it's overrated. It's like saying there won't be nice novels anymore now the typewritters are gone. Obviously that is false.

If anything, the opposite is true. I have seen many more nice pictures produced in the last 10 years than the 10 years before that, than the 10 years before THAT. I think it's due to better modern equipment.

kyoshinikon

You are missing something. "Better picture" is subject to the eye of the beholder. Sure our pictures are sharper, larger, and have more tones but is a photograph just a culmination of all that? The tool may be partially hype but it is also partially designed to be for a different photographer. It is a psychological thing and that psychology is in part what determines your results. When I shooting an event for a client I want my honking D700 with the 14-24mm as it is quick. It is a tool I can rely on to get my customers exactly what they want.

When I shoot for myself the process is just as important as the final product is because I want more than just a clean sharp photo. My other cameras can do it but they are two steps ahead of me and get me out of the mindset I want to be in. When was the last time you went out shooting and just came back with only 5 great photos? Not 1000 photos with 5 great shots, not 1000 photos with 500 "great" photos and 300 good photos, just 5. Shots that you knew were absolutely perfect and not a single dud. You probably dont even get the question. That is just one shooting style that benefits from a slowed down process and while I hate to break it to you some great writers still use a typewriter not because they are dinosaurs but because they want to. Some fashion designers use a manual signer instead of these modern sewing machines, many graphic artists till use pen and paper over their cintuique & wacom tablets, and yes many of us shoot film even though it is not as efficient or ergonomic.