Nikon Df General Discussion

TaoTeJared

@TaoTeJared - "This is the greatest performing available light street cam made to date, and it came in under $3,000."
Really? That is a pretty bold statement for a camera that hasn't hit the street yet.
Personally, I like the retro look but there are obviously better camera options for the same money, even fron Nikon. I am still looking for a second body.

You name a camera that can beat it. We know the AF from the D5200 beats any mirrorless camera out there, this is beyond that. We know the D4's sensor is better than any other sensor out there for available light. Who is going to beat it? I would suggest Sony's are good specs for the available light, but Sony has never controlled High Iso images as good as Canon and Nikon have - I don't see that changing with higher MP systems they released. They may, But I'm putting my money on Nikon.

@TaoTeJared:

Quote: "All you saw in my post was that it is an accessory like a purse? I have never met anyone who buys high-end cameras as accessories!"

Really? I have, they are out there in huge numbers! If that were not true, Nikon would not have made the DF. I would even go as far as to say that pretty much ALL of the reasons for buying the DF are emotional rather than logical. But, your other point about people who don't intend to get one are not qualified to comment? That is BS mate. Threads will only people agreeing like some mutual admiration society would be pretty dull reading! )

Other than those points, yeah, spot on.

I guess I don't have uber rich friends who spend $3,000 on a camera as an accessory. Every Leica shooter I have met are photographers first and have always shot Leica systems.

I take no issue with anyone who has legitimate complaints or who wants more resolution or needs a full D4 build for work. I can see some wanting video in it. Gripes about cost or you think it is too much like "X"? Suck it up go buy "X" and move on.

For instance here is one comment that I think brings up a good point and I would be concerned with, if I didn't have a D800.

The 4 fps is the real dealbreaker for me in the D800. For most that is not an issue, for me it is far more important than mpx. I may eventually give in and end up getting one later in its production life but it still would never end up being my go-to camera. The difference between 3fps, 4fps, & 5fps is huge That is why the money I saved up for a D700 replacement ended up going to a D700 and lenses (and the rest to save up for a D4) This DF may have split me over this. The only dislike I immediately have(having not handled it) is the 1/4000 a sec SS.

Why the 70-200mm f/4 for most of the test photos?

The 1/4000 is something I'm not pleased to see either, especially if you want to shoot wide open.

The other thing I'm trying to find is about the flash sync - it states only 1/250th. High speed sync?????? Is it there or gone?? If it is gone - that is not cool.

TaoTeJared

THE AF IS NOT THE D800 AF, IT ONLY GOES TO -1EV JUST LIKE THE D600, NOT -2EV LIKE THE D800/D4. THE F/8 IS IRRELEVANT.

and yes I had to shout as I have said it numerous times.

I'm trying to make since of this maybe you can help: What I'm reading into this is that the "f/8" spec is Now a marketing term and should no longer be seen as a full EV sensitivity rating? Is that what you are thinking as well?

I think this is what you are looking at:
D800: Detection range -2 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)
D610: Detection range -1 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)
DF: Detection range -1 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)

This is what I others are seeing as well:
D610: "Seven focus points compatible with f/8 make super-telephoto shooting attainable"
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d610/features03.htm
DF: "High-density 39-point AF system featuring seven focus points compatible with f/8 for superior subject-acquisition performance"
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/df/features05.htm

Msmoto

OK, OK, I suppose what I would have liked is a camera like a D800E, but with the specs of the new Df. I prefer to have all the controls identical on the bodies I shoot with.

donaldejose

I am with TTJ, Msmoto and PitchBlack. They all are right in their own way.

As to TTJ's points: Yes, I believe the D4 sensor is better at high ISO than the D3s because it has more detail. It is the best high ISO sensor Nikon now offers. Yes, it does give you about 2 stops additional usable image quality over a D800 or D600. So if you are going to need to shoot at ISO 3200 or ISO 6400 having a body with the D4 sensor is what you want. You have two choices now: a $6,000 D4 or a $2,700 Df. In a way doesn't that make the Df the "real" replacement for the d700 which so many people wanted? A D3 sensor for half the price is what the D700 offered and the Df offers the same option for the D4 sensor.

As to PitchBlack's points: Yes, I too am spoiled by the wonderful ability of the D800 to capture detail and IMHO it produces amazing 24x36 inch prints. When I am capturing an image which I think may be printed that large I tend to want to have it taken by my D800. The D600 will come quite close in quality and certainly is adequate but the D800 is the best IQ you can get today for large prints. The detail in D800 images does spoil you once you start using one and print large.

As to Msmotos points: Yes, I too want as similar controls as possible in two cameras if I am going to switch between them. The difference between the D800 and D600 layout is irritating enough. The difference between the D800 and Df layout would be just too much irritation for me (older folks do tend to have less capable minds for multitasking and benefit from not having to remember which body we are using when we are looking though the viewfinder and need to make a quick adjustment without lowering the camera to look at it). This last point is the "dealbreaker" for me. As much as I would love to have the Df user interface to bring back pleasant memories from my youth, I would only want one if there was a complete line up of Df bodies so I could have one with the D800 sensor and one with the D4 sensor. Perhaps that option will occur in a few years. If the Df is now using the D4 sensor for half the price of a D4 then perhaps Nikon will produce a Df2 using the approximately 50mp sensor expected to be in the soon to be available D4x and sell it for half the price of a D4x? That would give someone the option of a body with a high megapixel sensor and a body with a low light sensor using the same user interface. I do hope Nikon goes in this direction. Now that the Df body exists it should not be too hard to iterate it with each of the FX sensors Nikon has, and will have, in their lineup.

sevencrossing

OK, OK, I suppose what I would have liked is a camera like a D800E,

I think what you want is a D800 sensor in a D800 Body with no AA filter

sevencrossing

Well the good news (for Nikon) is KR, the man with the growing family, who we love to hate
thinks its the best thing since sliced sliced bread. He loves the engraved and knurled solid metal dials.
So there are people out there, for who the look of a camera, is far important than its performance
KR says he will throwing his crappy D800E in the bin

proudgeek

I read that review and took note of his comment about his "crappy" D800. Almost makes you want to go dumpster diving outside of his house.

tc88

@TTJ, I hope by now you have realized the shortcomings of your understanding. But if not, let me elaborate some more.

Build. Both Df/D600 claim equivalence to D800. However, D800 is full magnesium while the front of Df/D600 is not. That's why you read reports here that people had lens mounts ripped off from D600. So the build qualities of Df and D600 are same and inferior to D800.

Sensor. You made it sound the 16MP is the one and only one magic sensor for low light. It's not. While I don't care DXO's overall score, I think their ISO and DR values are pretty accurate. I believe Msmoto herself wrote before that at 3200 and below, D800 is more suited. But I will let her comment if she chooses. We can agree to disagree.

AF. There is more to f/8 which all current Nikon FX cameras have anyway. f/8 is more related to phase detection and is artificial anyway. There is the sensitivity diffierence as Gareth noted, there is 9 vs 15 cross points, there is the spread of the focus area. I would say it's the #1 dealbreaker for people on the fence.

So this is not a mini D4. Far from it. It's just a reclothed D6-- with fancy dials on top. This is targetting people who will use it as primary and who values form over functionality. As spraynpray said, "pretty much ALL of the reasons for buying the DF are emotional rather than logical." Maybe Nikon could also be targetting people like here http://leicarumors.com/2011/03/10/leica-m-shooters-dont-forget-to-take-your-lens-cap-off.aspx/

Tradewind35

For me, a handsome piece of design from the front, and the top plate is class.
The back plate - hmmm, bit of a button-fest there. Presumably those are the purifying buttons that will lead me to the enlightenment of "Pure photography". I can't wait.
Bit miffed if Nikon insist I have to have a 50mm with it as have two 50's and a 55 already. And think I would prefer two SD cards as am bound to loose one of the little critters. Oh and I would rather it had a big, big battery cause I doubt if it will run off my MD12.
But apart from those little nigglettes - take a deep bow Nikon boffins, you have excelled yourselves, just as long as it does not have the inbuilt muck spreader supplied in the 600
Robin

Gareth

THE AF IS NOT THE D800 AF, IT ONLY GOES TO -1EV JUST LIKE THE D600, NOT -2EV LIKE THE D800/D4. THE F/8 IS IRRELEVANT.

and yes I had to shout as I have said it numerous times.

I'm trying to make since of this maybe you can help: What I'm reading into this is that the "f/8" spec is Now a marketing term and should no longer be seen as a full EV sensitivity rating? Is that what you are thinking as well?

I think this is what you are looking at:
D800: Detection range -2 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)
D610: Detection range -1 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)
DF: Detection range -1 to +19 EV (ISO 100, 20°C/68°F)

This is what I others are seeing as well:
D610: "Seven focus points compatible with f/8 make super-telephoto shooting attainable"
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d610/features03.htm
DF: "High-density 39-point AF system featuring seven focus points compatible with f/8 for superior subject-acquisition performance"
http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/df/features05.htm

Exactly, it's just marketing fluff. I think it actually hurts Nikon to market like this as it makes the -2EV on the top bodies sound like less of a feature.

PB_PM

How is it less of a feature? It means that the D800 will still focus at F8, at -1ev more than the D610/Df. In other words the D800 will focus in moonlight, and the D610/Df can get by only with dim streetlights. What's the mystery here?

PB_PM

Oh and I would rather it had a big, big battery cause I doubt if it will run off my MD12.
Robin

The camera is rated for 1400 shots per charge, what more do you want? Not to mention those little EN-EL14 batteries are cheaper than the EN-EL15.

kenadams

I think the specs reflect a general sense of confusion a lot of people here as well as reviewers and pros all over the usual internet pages express. Nikon's segmentation of their own offerings seem a bit too much sales department driven. Typically you'd want to put a high performer into every market segment, but Nikon deliberately seems keeping to artificially cripple their products. There are the two top of the line items that have it all and cater to totally different crowds, but beneath those there are a lot of trade offs - high build quality but low end autofocus. Lower segment though gets that autofocus. All in order to keep the price down? I guess that for the right mix, more people would spend more money, and if you do it right, sales from one segment would not necessarily decrease those of another. Like this they keep scratching their heads. Here's the super duper best performing street camera for low light..yes? Still the autofocus specs seem to have it struggle in low light. Weird.

Gareth

How is it less of a feature? It means that the D800 will still focus at F8, at -1ev more than the D610/Df. In other words the D800 will focus in moonlight, and the D610/Df can get by only with dim streetlights. What's the mystery here?

I suggest you read my post again. I didn't say it's less of a feature.

PB_PM

But that is exactly what you said ...

I think it actually hurts Nikon to market like this as it makes the -2EV on the top bodies sound like less of a feature.

How else was I to interpret what you said?

autofocus

Wow, all the haters... I have a D700, D800, and D4 and may have to get the Df as well. I really like the looks, size, and specs. I may have to finally part with my beloved D700 though. But I think that would be a great upgrade. Looks like it will be out of stock for a while so I have time to investigate further.

bland

I just went through the comparison deal on Nikon and I'm getting one ordered tomorrow.
I think it deals a lot with what your shooting venues are and in about half of my venues it'll be a plus.

Pro's:
I like the controls.
I like it's low light ability.
I like the looks, frick'in sweet! (hope they have a leather wrap for it)

Con's:
Battery
No CF cards
Most likely it'll have a different download cable as well. I'll never understand why they all don't have the same one?
Price

Gareth

But that is exactly what you said ...

I think it actually hurts Nikon to market like this as it makes the -2EV on the top bodies sound like less of a feature.

How else was I to interpret what you said?

Simple enough.

By "market like this" I meant Nikon marketing the Df as capable of af down to f/8.

By "sound like less of a feature" I meant that the -2EV on the D4/800, which is obviously a great feature, sounds like less of a feature as the D4/800 are marketed as going to f/8 as well.

This means people who know no better may think the Df/D600 are just as capable of low light af as the D4/800, which is not the case.

I hope this makes sense.

safyre

This article in F-Stopper about the Df nails it:
http://fstoppers.com/the-nikon-df-represents-everything-wrong-with-photography

Great link. My greatest issue with the DF is that it was created with one one thing in mind, to prey on those who care more about form than functionality. For the small minority that believes that these new 'features' will be of use, I'm glad you can justify paying such a huge premium because I sure can't. If I wanted nostalgia, I would shoot with my film camera or take some polaroids. And once you get past it's exterior, you will realize that the Df is still just a regular digital camera like everything else. Lipstick on a pig is still a pig. Is it a good business move from Nikon? Maybe, maybe not. I for one do not buy into the whole "pure photography" aspect. Putting on retro dials and taking away video does not make your photography any purer; it just gives you a fashion accessory you can talk about at your next dinner party.

And if it comes to the point where one needs a camera to look different in order to start shooting, then I suggest you start looking into other hobbies. In the end, it's all about the art and photography that matter. Somewhere down the road we've lost sight of that, we've started linking camera's to computers, thinking that the bigger and bigger the numbers are, the better it is. And now that the numbers are starting to plateau, we've moved on to the next step, making our camera's look different, sleeker, shinier, like how Apple did it for laptops. Sure it's a great business idea, but a camera is no different a medium than a paint brush, a typewriter, or a pencil. And yet none of those have been relegated to a status symbol....just cameras. "Pure photography" has nothing to do with what you have in your hands, but what you have in your head. It's about spending more time actually focusing on what you see in front of you, than talking about what you have in your bag. Those are the real roots of photography that I hope we as a community get back to some day.

kyoshinikon

I disagree with the fstoppers article as it comes from a modern viewpoint. When cameras are reviewed they are generally rated on speed, responsiveness, image quality, and image capacity. A better camera is faster, smarter, superior quality, and can fit many pictures. As someone who weaves in and out professionally this is important to me as a job. While I am creative I will shoot an entire gig quite mechanically. This is what my client "wants" at "this exposure". My tools are optimized to make sure I get what I want. I dont think about the settings because I've shot enough to almost instinctively figure it out and if I get it wrong... Ill fix it in post. Photos are so easy to create that they have little value. Too many people make them. Sure my photos are better or I wouldn't get paid for them, but even that is a blurry line. The idea of seriously composing a shot and choosing the exposure based on what you want the light to be is a slowly dying art.

Most of us strive for the "best" exposure and care more about the subject than the photo as a photograph. They are records, memories, pictorials of reality. A photo of an eagle swooping down to get a fish may be a beautiful photo but it's focus is on the subject. there is nothing wrong with that all. However camera manufacturers in focusing on this shooting style left behind the idea of photographing with the process and digital covered up its tracks. Photographing for the photo is a hard thing to convey but I have done it as a personal thing. What you learn there is immense and the experience is wonderful. Can you do it with any tool? Yes but between the speed oriented design of the modern tools and the mass produced/short life of digital imaging leaves a physiological barrier that is hard to get past as a photographer if you want to focus on the photo for what it is. A tool like this is the perfect tonic for photographers like me. It has the functions needed but not so convenient that some of the experience is lost.

The experience of making a photograph for the photo is a wonderful experience and often has effects on your life the other style doesn't. Additionally I for one am happier with the work that comes form this experience. At the last US surfing open I brought my speed graphlex. I was happy with 6 of the 8 frames I had. Out of the few thousand that my D700, D7000, and D90 racked up I was happy with less than 5% even though around 70-80% of the photos were good. The difference was in the psychology of the process. The "pure photography" concept may have been full of hype but there is a bit of truth to it.

TaoTeJared

This article in F-Stopper about the Df nails it:
http://fstoppers.com/the-nikon-df-represents-everything-wrong-with-photography

All fair criticisms for sure and all the same reasons my main rig will always be a D800/D4 style of body & features. As a "working" photog camera it falls short in many ways - but honestly not much differently than any Fuji, Oly, and even smaller DSLRs. As a walk around body, back-up body/second body (all of which spend more time hanging from a shoulder or neck than being handled) I think it is no better or worse than a hand cramping D3xxx series.

OK, OK, I suppose what I would have liked is a camera like a D800E, but with the specs of the new Df. I prefer to have all the controls identical on the bodies I shoot with.

There is much to be said about that! At some point in my shooting days, I choose the "reverse dials" in my D300 and got use to it, when I got my D800 (set as default) it really messed with me for a day until I shot both at the same time. As I have mentioned before, I shoot with a X100 as a 2nd body and I actually really like that I can just look at the dials and know what settings it is at. I'll shoot some film along side every once in a while (FE2 or Voigtlander) and it is easier to just look and see the settings. Generally I'll test shot on my DSLR to get the setting and not to waste frames. If shooting with a 2nd body, that is much easier if you can just look and see it especially if it is another brand. If I am running and gunning though - I have my D300 and set to the same as my D800.

+1. I've been totally spoiled by my D800s. Whenever I think about getting a Df for "light work" I run into dealbreakers. The autofocus system is a dealbreaker. The choice to go with the D4 as opposed to the D600 sensor is a dealbreaker. The 1/4000 is almost a dealbreaker. I wanted something cool to take with me on trips, but the truth is that even on trips the 36mp come in handy.

This isn't a mini D4 for sure - just the sensor, which is what I really like. If someone needs the fastest AF they will be looking at a D800/D4 or if they use the full 51point &/or 3d focusing. 90% I'm on single point AF so rarely do I ever take advantage of the full system. When I venture out of the norm and need it though - I love having it. I see shooter who shoot like me on just single AF point would not care at all. 1/4000th is something I do use especially with HSS with flashes. It is really nice to be able to shoot in mid day and knock the background down. There is the ISO 50 option and of course ND filters - just not as convenient though.
36mp is great to have - (pain to store and work files) but most of the time, I could easily get away with less. If you look at what other photogs are doing with the mirrorless systems with 16mp, and what I have seen coming out of the likes of the canon 7d and other canon's at 18mp, I think there is a sweet spot of 16-20 where it is more than enough for "general" shooting. Cropping though... you don't have much leeway.

bland

This article in F-Stopper about the Df nails it:
http://fstoppers.com/the-nikon-df-represents-everything-wrong-with-photography

Nail what, he's never had the camera in his hands to make an honest review?

I'm trying to count all the negative reviews of the D800 before it hit the store shelves. Sure didn't hear any negative reviews of the D800 once these bloggers got the camera in their hands!

PB_PM

Why

But that is exactly what you said ...

I think it actually hurts Nikon to market like this as it makes the -2EV on the top bodies sound like less of a feature.

How else was I to interpret what you said?

Simple enough.

By "market like this" I meant Nikon marketing the Df as capable of af down to f/8.

By "sound like less of a feature" I meant that the -2EV on the D4/800, which is obviously a great feature, sounds like less of a feature as the D4/800 are marketed as going to f/8 as well.

This means people who know no better may think the Df/D600 are just as capable of low light af as the D4/800, which is not the case.

I hope this makes sense.

I get that, but the two are not at all connected. Enabling the camera to focus at F8 vs F5.6 with some bodies is merely a firmware change. Canon did the just that with the 5D MKIII and 1DX, after the cameras had been on the market for 6-8 months, via a firmware update (on shipping they were both rated to only focus to F5.6, but now after the update they can focus at F8). Having the AF sensor able to focus at -2ev vs -1ev is not directly linked. The fact that Nikon also publishes the ev rating at which the AF sensor can function negates your augment.

KnockKnock

For me as a hobbyist (autocorrect keeps changing hobbiest to hobbits), I think that the extra cost that goes into the body manufacturing and the D4 sensor are probably not as valuable to me. Just my priorities. Wishing they came out with a D610-level machine, that's all.

It's making me appreciate how much of a bargain the D610 still is. Sure, I'd love to have a Df. I appreciate the form factor and grew up with an 80's SLR. I'm shooting a fresh roll this week in it. I really hope they don't go all noodly with the merging of analog and digital controls. Hmph.

Sitting tight for real shipping-product reviews.

PB_PM

And the D800 is a newly shaped plastic shell over the mag alloy body of the D700 with a high resolution sensor, and the D700 was just a slightly bigger shell with a full frame sensor than what was on the D300. What's your point?

The problem is that the development period of the D600 and Df is the same. Both projects started back in 2009. Hmm. So is it just a retro D600 body, or were they developed together with different purposes. I mean the D600 is just a D7000 with a full frame sensor. We could go on and on with this till we get back to the D1...