Nikon Df General Discussion

Photobug

ryrylawski, yes I saw it was listed in the December issue but but not as a finalist for COY. I was surprised that the 70D was mentioned as a finalist.

Also don't get how a slow AF at 2 fps can get the nomination as shawnino indicated.

rbrylawski

Yes, the fps is slow, but I'm guessing the FF sensor with 36 mp, in a compact body and excellent IQ is the reason for the COY. I suspect it predicts the future of DSLR technology and will surely improve, even though the winner may not do all a full size DSLR can do today, it's still a pretty cool achievement.

kyoshinikon

Just a thought (although unrelated to current spin on discussion) can the DF take those old mirror lockup fisheyes?

It seems like it wouldn't be a hard feature to add

Golf007sd

A quick grab, for size comparison purposes, of the current Nikon Df (2013) and the Nikkormat FT-3 from 1977.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/11213892414/in/photostream

Taken with the Canon IXUS 80 that was in my pocket.

May be of interest, Mick

NikonMick

When I first saw the silver version of the Df, my thought was that the form factor looked a lot like the Canon G16.

So I grabbed an FT-3 from the archive, went to my preferred camera shop, and thanks to Tom Taylor of Twin City Cameras in Adelaide Australia, was able to compare the bodies of the Df and the FT-3.

For a long time I'd thought the FT-3 was biggish, but in fact it's smaller than the DF.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/68039985@N08/?details=1

msoon77

Guys, I've just bought the black DF. I've been following this thread for a while and thought I'd throw in my 2-cents worth. Here's the lengthy post. http://www.marksoon.com/blog/2013/nikondf-review

rbrylawski

Thanks for your unbiased and honest review. Based on your review though, one has to wonder what your $3k got you that surpasses what you have in your D600, other than a very cool looking, retro body.

donaldejose

I agree. It seems to me the only real thing you get for an additional $1,000 is better high ISO performance which is not really the target audience of the Df so I don't see the point.

msoon77

What you guys have stated is very true indeed. But, the way I see it, the extra $1000 does give you more functionality. Minor stuff to some, big deal to others:

- Extra AF-on button
- Spot metering on current focus point.
- High ISO (D4 sensor) performance (useful when I'm outside the studio)
- OK button to zoom on playback (zoom % adjustable)
- 1 extra customizable button at the front of the camera
- Lighter, more packable body compared to D600
- What appears to me, like a slightly more defined monitor at the back (sharper) - I could be seeing things
- Faster more accurate AF in low light conditions (vs my D600)
- AND OF COURSE - A NICE looking camera compared to the D600 (which looks very cheap to me) but this I agree is not worth paying $1000 extra for. On the other hand, with all the above put together, it just might be.

donaldejose

"Faster more accurate AF in low light conditions (vs my D600)." Interesting, others have made the same comment. I thought they both used the same 39 point AF module. If so, what accounts for the difference in AF speed? Am I wrong about them using the same AF module?

Fritz

I wonder if this discussion isn't really about the Df, 610, 8oo, D4 but perhaps about the possible replacement of the D700? The D700 was and is a lot of camera packed into a price point that most all of us could afford and perhaps we are hoping for the next generation? Of course, Nikon is unlikely to go there given the potential impact on the D800 and the D4 but it would be nice to dream…….

rbrylawski

What you guys have stated is very true indeed. But, the way I see it, the extra $1000 does give you more functionality. Minor stuff to some, big deal to others:

- Extra AF-on button
- Spot metering on current focus point.
- High ISO (D4 sensor) performance (useful when I'm outside the studio)
- OK button to zoom on playback (zoom % adjustable)
- 1 extra customizable button at the front of the camera
- Lighter, more packable body compared to D600
- What appears to me, like a slightly more defined monitor at the back (sharper) - I could be seeing things
- Faster more accurate AF in low light conditions (vs my D600)
- AND OF COURSE - A NICE looking camera compared to the D600 (which looks very cheap to me) but this I agree is not worth paying $1000 extra for. On the other hand, with all the above put together, it just might be.

I see your points, but have to wonder, since you already own a D600, if adding a DF got you something significant over what you already have? If you were trying to decide between which camera to buy and the DF won, I could see that. But you already have a D600. The two systems controls are so different, that for me, and I mean for me, the added body would be difficult to rationalize as a needed acquisition.

Symphotic

I just got home from a week in Japan. Most of the time I was off-shore filming a wind turbine mooring, but I did get a chance to stop in at Yodobashi in Ueno to look at the Df and chat with the other people looking at it. I didn't buy it, and I probably won't. There is nothing wrong with it, really: it is pretty much just as everyone has described it, but I can't justify that expense for personal use, and for professional use the same amount of money would be better spent on another D800. It is still too big for off-duty carry (as my son, the cop, would say) so I'll continue on with my X100s for that role.

Photobug

I agree with Sympohotic..nothing wrong with it you just can't justify that amount of money for personal use. I would so pay the delta for the D800.

I love the retro idea and the technology in the Df. I get my hands on one next Friday but right now see no excitement in buying

j0hnnyb1

I too have been following this forum for quite some time and thought I'd share my review of the Df with you...
http://photolisticlife.com/2013/12/06/full-nikon-df-review/

Photobug

Thanks for sharing. Good evaluation/review.

msoon77

What you guys have stated is very true indeed. But, the way I see it, the extra $1000 does give you more functionality. Minor stuff to some, big deal to others:


I see your points, but have to wonder, since you already own a D600, if adding a DF got you something significant over what you already have? If you were trying to decide between which camera to buy and the DF won, I could see that. But you already have a D600. The two systems controls are so different, that for me, and I mean for me, the added body would be difficult to rationalize as a needed acquisition.

Yeah I'm feeling the same now after a while. I think I'm gonna take the DF back to the store. I just can't justify having 2 cameras that pretty much do the same thing for me. If I kept the DF, the D600 would never be used. It just be a throwaway. And the D600 is a ton more ergonomic. The darn dials on the DF are too hard to turn. I'm just gonna miss the DF's size and look however...

Msmoto

SteveSFO Said:
Just some feedback for everyone on my recent experience with the DF.
The first thing I noticed was how light the camera was. I expected some weight to the body just like the older F3. But after the initial "this is light" sensation... it just started to feel right. How many times we have complained about "lugging" a DSLR. DF just feels a bit different. Which is not a bad thing.

The LCD Color shift
Many of us have had the experience with the D4 or D800 where the LCD had a greenish tint and had to adjust the auto white balance a bit to get it right. The DF I handled seemed to have the LCD issue addressed.

Better than expected
I thought the DF would be a nice camera and perhaps a good 2nd body or walk around DSLR - which it is.
I was a bit concerned that the DF with bits and pieces from other Nikons (D4 sensor, D610 AF, etc...) that this camera would be primarily for the consumer crowd. But, considering how good the D700 was and that it was made up from various parts... it looks like Nikon did well.

Sure, I would have loved to have the split focus screen, 51 AF points, 1/8000 shutter speed, etc... in the DF body, but then again... buy a D4 and if you need uber duber megapixels... buy the D800.

A DF will be in my future to compliment the D4 and D800. It's $3000 US and a lot of money, but it seems like it's worth it.

kyoshinikon

Normally I would like the merger of threads but I kinda liked having a fresh user experience one. This one has become a bit too long and muddled.

msoon77

What you guys have stated is very true indeed. But, the way I see it, the extra $1000 does give you more functionality. Minor stuff to some, big deal to others:


I see your points, but have to wonder, since you already own a D600, if adding a DF got you something significant over what you already have? If you were trying to decide between which camera to buy and the DF won, I could see that. But you already have a D600. The two systems controls are so different, that for me, and I mean for me, the added body would be difficult to rationalize as a needed acquisition.

Yup I have to agree. I thought i'd be getting an upper hand with the DF (better OVF so easier to manual focus), nicer body etc.. but as it turns out this is not the case.

msoon77

SteveSFO Said:
J

A DF will be in my future to compliment the D4 and D800. It's $3000 US and a lot of money, but it seems like it's worth it.

You might get super annoyed with the dials. They're really hard to turn. If any of you have played with the Fuji X systems, you'll see what i mean. Those Fuji's are perfect and quick to manipulate. The DF dials are way too stiff.

If you already have a D4 and D800, use the D800 as a walkaround camera with a prime lens on it to keep it light I'd say. If you don't have any of those cameras, then I guess buying the DF would be fine as you wouldn't know any better and it IS a GOOD camera at the end of the day. Just not fantastic...

TriShooter

@rbrylawski

I think most of us here appreciate honest comments, and questions. I thought your reasoning was excellent, and realize that we all have priorities that make a feature more, or less significant to us. You more likely than not have enabled him to get more bang for the buck for his money.

Msmoto likes the correction on the greenish tint to the LCD screen, and the weight, of the Df which is meaningful to her. I shoot NEF + JPG Fine in black and white so green, and blue tints on an LCD are not significant to me, and a heavier camera weight feels good to in my hands, nevertheless I still enjoy playing with small cameras like the V1.

It is easier for me to justify paying $2800 for a D800 over $1600/$2400 for a D600/610/Df because fast focusing, and tracking are my first priority in a camera. My logic is that a camera that has the finest lens, and the finest low light sensor on it with incredible dynamic range, but not the best auto-focus is a hurdle I want to avoid jumping, but I am not a wide angle landscape photographer. I will not buy a camera with less than excellent auto-focus regardless of its other features.

Even when shooting models free hand in a studio where a camera is preset for 100/200 ISO / F8 / 1/250th to produce a black image without strobes, I will still have to focus the camera. I have little no use for cameras that sacrifice on auto-focus technology.

I currently use the D300/D700/D800 which are very different cameras, but have one thing in common; they all focus well, and consequently they are fun to to shoot.

Golf007sd

@TriShooter: From all that I have read, AF system on the Df is outstanding, it is the AF points that people have an issue with to some extent. Hence, 39 AF-points which are very much packed together vs the D4 & D800 that are spread out more and have 51 of them.

With that said, I personally shot 90% of the time with a single AF point on my D4, as well as, my D7000 (which has the same 39-AF points as the Df/D600/D610). I only change it to 9-AF points when shooting fast moving subjects. I hardly ever us all 51 or 39 points active all at once.

Note: DF does not do video, while the others do, thus having all AF points active will help in tracking moving subjects.

PB_PM

@Golf007sd I agree. I hardly use AF points outside of the 15 central cross type ones on the D800/D700. The 9 on the Df might be a little restrictive, but you'd get used to it.

TaoTeJared

I agree. It seems to me the only real thing you get for an additional $1,000 is better high ISO performance which is not really the target audience of the Df so I don't see the point.

Target market are available light shooters - how is that not hitting the market?

"Faster more accurate AF in low light conditions (vs my D600)." Interesting, others have made the same comment. I thought they both used the same 39 point AF module. If so, what accounts for the difference in AF speed? Am I wrong about them using the same AF module?

Something interesting info I heard on this one. Went into the local store to go play with one but they were all sold out. (Evidently they are not selling as fast as the D800 but faster than the D800E and D4 for them.) One of the guys there (been there forever) said the Nikon rep told them the 39-point module is the same parts, but has been tweaked and is faster than the D600 and will be a bit different than the D610. No detail other than that.
Seeing what Fuji has done with my X100's auto focus with updates, there is little doubt Nikon probably has done it.