Nikon Df General Discussion

1235734

Comments

  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    I have a lot of respect for the guys at F-stoppers. But I have to disagree on their position on the Df's lack of video. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I do not believe that the Leica M9 has video either, only their new M body does. Those that make the owners of M9 "fashionable photographers?"
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,731Member
    edited November 2013
    And you totally missed the main point of my post...

    I have a D800 and D700, so I have a good idea of what the differences are.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    edited November 2013
    The df on the other hand is exactly a d600 with a d4 sensor in a retro body.
    I agree on that part. As do these guys.

    Post edited by Golf007sd on
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
  • kenadamskenadams Posts: 222Member
    The fstoppers article was crap. Lee himself admitted to that. Elitist bullshit, sorry. So I'm a hipster now because every once in a while I like to take out my father's Minolta or my uncle's M3 and shoot it? I do it for fun - what does that make him, wedding shooter with too much money and not enough time for his own projects looking down on others? Great premise for the owner of a website. In the comments on another thread someone dug up a review of that article that was hilariously angry and spot on.
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    Without question, this body will allow a lot of user to take some great pictures. I just LOVE the D4 sensor....bravo Nikon...bravo!!!

    Nikon Df
    Nikon Df 85 1.8G 1/4000 ISO 1250 @ f/1.8
    Larger image size -- Best view

    Nikon Df
    Nikon Df 85 1.8G 1/4000 ISO 1250 @ f/1.8
    Larger image size -- A must see.
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,751Moderator
    I can't understand the negativity myself, either the DF is for you, or it is not. If it is not, forget it and get on with your life. Maybe the negativity is due to the D600 fiasco - I dunno - but I do know that we are all individuals so Nikon (or any other manufacturer) stand no chance of pleasing all of us all of the time. This internet thingy sure makes it easy for everybody to complain!

    Myself? I will not buy one because I have to spread my funds more thinly, but I would like one with the leather case and a 35mm lens for everyday carry shooting.
    Always learning.
  • blandbland Posts: 809Member

    We all know exactly what it is: a d600 with a d4 sensor wrapped up in a retro body and sold at a premium.
    Less pixels with higher iso means better low light shooting. I agree it's over priced and not everyone shoots low light concerts but for those of that do this is a plus without going to a $6000 camera, plus it looks cool! :)
  • framerframer Posts: 479Member
    edited November 2013
    I just figured out no focus screen options. That's lame. I use a brightscreen in my D3s and have always had several screens for all my film bodies.

    framer
    Post edited by framer on
  • MsmotoMsmoto Posts: 5,356Moderator
    The discussion is interesting, but, maybe we all need to use the Df, in hand, at a real shoot, working with a client or at least with a specified goal in mind, then after a few thousand frames we can say yea or nay.

    My feelings are mixed due to my having used the "F" body so much in the past, and now have a couple modern bodies which I find very easy to use and easy to control. At the present time I cannot say whether I will like the new Df or not. The answer will be found once I can really put my hands on one.
    Msmoto, mod
  • itsnotmeyouknowitsnotmeyouknow Posts: 481Member
    I hope that I have read wrong elsewhere that the camera will make the sound of film rewinding when you download the images to your computer.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 5,751Moderator
    LOL! - Wicked!
    Always learning.
  • SymphoticSymphotic Posts: 506Member
    The discussion is interesting, but, maybe we all need to use the Df, in hand, at a real shoot, working with a client or at least with a specified goal in mind, then after a few thousand frames we can say yea or nay.

    My feelings are mixed due to my having used the "F" body so much in the past, and now have a couple modern bodies which I find very easy to use and easy to control. At the present time I cannot say whether I will like the new Df or not. The answer will be found once I can really put my hands on one.
    This is spot on and precisely why I didn't pre-order what I think could be a slick camera.
    I still believe this could be a fun recreational camera, but I want to wait. For recreation, speed of operation, focus accuracy, and a good zoom matter. ( my grandson moves fast). Will the Df work well for that?
    "At the present time I cannot say whether I will like the new Df or not. The answer will be found once I can really put my hands on one"
    Jack Roberts
    "Discovery consists in seeing what everyone else has seen and thinking what nobody else has thought"--Albert Szent-Gyorgy
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 227Member
    edited November 2013
    kenadams, your post illustrated the situation very well. The nostalgia factor. You pull out a Minolta occasionally because it's old and different. Just like there are people who pay premium for antique furnitures. No one says you can't. As a business, it's perfectly reasonable for Nikon to try to take advantage of that and charge a premium in the process.

    However, if you say you use Minolta because in general it takes better pictures, you could get laughed at. :) Same for Df. People can get better camera for same price or same camera for less because one will have already paid a premium for the Df form. Remember nothing is free. That's all being pointed out by people who care functionality over form. I don't see issue with that either.
    Post edited by tc88 on
  • TaoTeJaredTaoTeJared Posts: 1,306Member
    The discussion is interesting, but, maybe we all need to use the Df, in hand, at a real shoot, working with a client or at least with a specified goal in mind, then after a few thousand frames we can say yea or nay....
    Only issue with that is you have to buy one before you could ever put that much work onto one. All the rental places will be sending their systems out to reviewers for the better part of the next year.

    Love the ending of the "Camera Store Guys" video. No video!! Boo Hoo.

    I don't get the reason why fstoppers created an article in the first place - no system in hand and really not the type of work that I would think you would want to use a Df for.

    With so much of the DF sharing components (*that's never happened before -*sarcasm) and so much negativity of that, So does everyone think the D7100, D600 (exclude sensor issues) & D610 are all crap? I know I don't read those threads often but I never got that impression.
    D800, D300, D50(ir converted), FujiX100, Canon G11, Olympus TG2. Nikon lenses - 24mm 2.8, 35mm 1.8, (5 in all)50mm, 60mm, 85mm 1.8, 105vr, 105 f2.5, 180mm 2.8, 70-200vr1, 24-120vr f4. Tokina 12-24mm, 16-28mm, 28-70mm (angenieux design), 300mm f2.8. Sigma 15mm fisheye. Voigtlander R2 (olive) & R2a, Voigt 35mm 2.5, Zeiss 50mm f/2, Leica 90mm f/4. I know I missed something...
  • BesoBeso Posts: 462Member
    Perhaps some of the negativity surrounding the Df can be attributed to the marketing build up, including the teaser videos, prior to actual release of the camera. This type of marketing tends to build expectations with no basis in fact, and thus those expectations are frequently unmet. Marketing can be a double-edged sword. You want to hype the product and generate interest, even frenzy, but creating expectations can be risky. Only time will tell if Nikon has produced a critical success and economic winner.
    Occasionally a decent image ...
  • SmacSmac Posts: 9Member
    Someone please enlighten me. If this camera had the D610 sensor in it, there would be absolutely no justification for it to cost more than the D610. Given that the difference in cost between the D610 sensor and the D4 sensor is likely to be minimal, why is it so expensive? I cannot believe that, at conception, this was destined to be anything other than a budget FF. Nikon can't even position it logically in its FF lineup. The only logical place for it is below the D610... Isn't it?
  • moreorlessmoreorless Posts: 109Member
    The fstoppers article was crap. Lee himself admitted to that. Elitist bullshit, sorry. So I'm a hipster now because every once in a while I like to take out my father's Minolta or my uncle's M3 and shoot it? I do it for fun - what does that make him, wedding shooter with too much money and not enough time for his own projects looking down on others? Great premise for the owner of a website. In the comments on another thread someone dug up a review of that article that was hilariously angry and spot on.
    What makes it worse is that you know with a bit of searching you'll be able to find Fstoppers articles gushing with praise for the Fuji X system, didn't they post something about the X100 being the "death of the SLR"?

    I think that really highlights the issue with a lot of negative reactions, the retro sales pitch has hitherto only ever been linked to mirrorless systems, seeing it used on a "boring old SLR" doesn't go down nearly as well.

    Perhaps this was a cunning plan by Nikon? like the dad who joins in with an activity or fashion he doesn't want his kids involved with in order to take away its rebellious edge? ;)

  • moreorlessmoreorless Posts: 109Member
    Someone please enlighten me. If this camera had the D610 sensor in it, there would be absolutely no justification for it to cost more than the D610. Given that the difference in cost between the D610 sensor and the D4 sensor is likely to be minimal, why is it so expensive? I cannot believe that, at conception, this was destined to be anything other than a budget FF. Nikon can't even position it logically in its FF lineup. The only logical place for it is below the D610... Isn't it?
    Theres of course a difference between the production cost of a sensor and the devolpment cost, even with the Df this sensor is likely to sell far fewer than Sony's now standard 24mp and 36mp ones so more of the devolpment cost needs to be paid per unit.

    Beyond that I'd say you could justify charging more for the manual controls on the Df than you could the D610's more standard layout.

    If we were talking a difference of say $1500(which honiestly I'd have expected if you'd showed me those adds pre A7 release price) I could understand the grief but $750 doesn't strike me as that extreme.
  • kenadamskenadams Posts: 222Member
    tc88, there's a place for everything :-D I have a long running personal relationship with that old Minolta. I carved a power switch from coconut wood when the old one broke - that was before ebay came along to supply me with spare parts.

    But funny stories aside, it gives me a different feeling than a digital camera, it handles differently and takes different images (not saying better, mind you). I just resent Lee's suggestion that I do that for purely aesthetical reasons, other than the resulting image or the fun experience. After all, it's a hobby for me.

    The nostalgia factor in the DF is fine - I just think it's over priced for what it delivers. And so do a lot of people all over the net, just read the articles. And that's also where it differs from the likes of a D7100 or a D610 where the price seems more fitting with regards to the features. My personal opinion.

    Smac, I'm no expert on sensors, but I think it's safe to assume that you can't put a price tag on a sensor by it's area size alone.

    Btw, here's the retort to the fstoppers article I was talking about above:
    http://www.lighting-essentials.com/whats-wrong-with-photography-nothing-its-photo-writers-we-should-question/
  • itsnotmeyouknowitsnotmeyouknow Posts: 481Member
    I think that at the price point the Df has been pitched at it is going to be a difficult one to convince a lot of people on. In the UK, at release, you won't be able to buy it body only - you have to buy it with the kit 50mm. If I were looking to buy the camera,which at £2750 inc 50mm, I'm not, this is a massive disincentive.

    At this price point, the IQ had better be at least as good as D800. I think it could struggle with this though. Hell it's even more expensive than a brand new D800E in the UK, and some stores are doing free 50mm 1.8G with it at £2395.

    Don't get me wrong, it looks great. But at this price point I won't touch it with a very long bargepole.
  • tc88tc88 Posts: 227Member
    edited November 2013
    So does everyone think the D7100, D600 (exclude sensor issues) & D610 are all crap? I know I don't read those threads often but I never got that impression.
    No. I think D7100 got favorable marks here. Same for D600 (excluding dust/oil issues as you say which we beat to oblivion). So maybe we indeed are objective? :)
    Post edited by tc88 on
  • blandbland Posts: 809Member
    Ordered mine today through our local camera store, got the chrome body. I got Grand Funk Railroad to shoot at the end of the month, fingers crossed they start sending them out by then. $2750 was the price they gave me for body only.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,731Member
    Admin (Peter) is reporting that demand for the Df from major retailers is lower than initial demand for the D800. Not a shocking surprise, considering that the the D800 was replacing a 3 year old camera. The Df isn't directly replacing anything. It's more of an add-on.
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
  • AdeAde Posts: 1,071Member
    After all the excitement, I am disappointed with the Df. It's a good camera no doubt, but it's also style over substance.

    But my disappointment stems more from the fact that the Df doesn't offer anything new. There's nothing special about this camera. The specs read like an intentionally crippled D4. One doesn't produce great designs by intentionally compromising it.

    Nikon had a chance to do something bold. Like making a true pro-level FX mirrorless. Or one with interchangable prisms. Heck make it monochrome. Do something, Nikon! Anything! Put some imagination and magic into your products!

    I hope the Df sells well -- beyond expectations -- but I think Nikon blew what could have been a grand slam opportunity, and there aren't that many chances left.
  • PB_PMPB_PM Posts: 3,731Member
    edited November 2013
    The specs read like an intentionally crippled D4.
    One could argue that the D700 was an intentionally crippled D3. I just don't fully understand that line of reasoning.

    As for mirrorless. Meh. Get a Sony if you want that crap.
    Post edited by PB_PM on
    If I take a good photo it's not my camera's fault.
Sign In or Register to comment.