Nikon Df General Discussion

donaldejose

"The specs read like an intentionally crippled D4" Sure, but also less than half the price.

kyoshinikon

As for mirrorless. Meh. Get a Sony if you want that crap.

Ditto...

Ade

One could argue that the D700 was an intentionally crippled D3. I just don't fully understand that line of reasoning.

You got that backwards. The D700 was apparently "not crippled enough" for Nikon's taste. That's why they had to introduce the D3S promptly.

Now with the Df, they've made sure the camera is crippled for most professionals. Substandard AF, single SD card, lower fps, no video, and a gimmicky UI. Really, Nikon, this is your definition of "pure photography?"

You want to repeat the D700's success? Put that D4 sensor into a modern D800 body, w/same fps, 51-point AF, dual-card slot, video… THAT would sell 10:1 to the Df. Not a crippled product. No retro-poser gimmicks required.

As for mirrorless. Meh. Get a Sony if you want that crap.

I have one mirrorless camera. Do you know who made it? Nikon.

PB_PM

The Nikon 1 series isn't full frame, the last time I checked anyway, so it's not really in the same league.

Regardless the Df is not a "true" D700 replacement, that's already been out for well over a year. Nor is the Df a mini D4, which I agree is a little disappointing. Nor is the Df a D610 with a lower resolution sensor. The Df is the Df. Take it or leave it as it is.

TaoTeJared

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?

I'll take that as sarcasm. I have played with all of Nikon's DSLRs and found the 3xxx & 5xxx series to be noticeably lacking in AF compared to the D800 but the D600 I played with didn't seem much different if any at all. None were bad at all. I use a D50 (IR converted) and that AF stinks. The AF systems nor metering are horrible - and actually basically the same as what was in the D300/D700/D3/D3s.

There is something to be said about crippling a camera with the D4 sensor as D700 did take D3 sales. (The D3s was released on schedule prior to the Olympics as usual though.) So in essence it is in-between the D610 and D800 and the price is slightly north of the mid-point of that which to me makes since with a new body design. I'm just curious how many would be jumping at it if it was $2,300-2,500.

No matter the price, I have other items my money is heading to before the end of the year but this and the 58mm 1.4 will be on the top of the list for next year.

Just a note, the D4 sensor would cost more to make due to it's less volume as would the body as it is a new design, plus more moving parts.

spraynpray

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.

I struggle to understand those sales positions, the 5D3 is much higher than the D800 which is 43rd! Maybe a sales tool...

sevencrossing

I like amazon but bought my D800 from the local Nikon dealer

sevencrossing

I am sure we all aware, of the practice of offering goods at a very inflate price, for a short period then selling them at half price
a half price Df might be quite attractive

KnockKnock

Well, maybe $2400 come 2015... do I hear $2200?

Beso

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.

The first priority of any successful business is generating profit. It is profit that drives the ability to do R&D, innovate, and build new and exciting products that push the envelope. Nikon is struggling and their most recent financials indicate the struggle is likely to continue. Nikon is still profitable but not to the degree that bodes well for the immediate future in terms of R&D and innovation, and certainly not to the degree that would satisfy investors. Declining revenue and declining profits never do. The Df is not a product that will enhance the bottom line for Nikon. It is too expensive and too "niche" oriented to do that.

Nikon needs to partner with a major cell phone manufacturer and/or find a solution with a decent profit margin they can sell to the masses. Only when companies are doing well do they develop the kinds of products that feed our appetites. It is the financial freedom to do so that builds a reputation for cutting edge, ground breaking performance.

Nikon has a reputation for first class products but that reputation will be tested by their own efforts as well as by the competition. The early D800 focus issues and the D600 oil/dust issues are/were internal challenges that left a bit of tarnish. Canon, Sony, and Sigma are throwing out other challenges. The third, and often unrecognized, challenge is our shifting attention span. Many years ago a D800 would have held our attention and aspirations for maybe a decade. Today, such a groundbreaking and game changing achievement has a significantly shorter lifespan.

Right or wrong, good or bad, those of us who use and love our Nikon products need to hope that Nikon finds the right product line to fuel revenues and profits so we can continue to get the high end, cutting edge, superior quality products that we desire. Photography is an art but for Nikon it first needs to be a business.

Smac

Fact, there is no truly budget/consumer FF out there. If you were to envisage one it would have the feature set of the Df. That's why I feel,somewhere along the line, Nikon chickened out. Or that the anticipated budget competition just didn't appear ( can we truly say there is real cut throat competition out there? Sometimes it looks like more of a club- " come on in Sony, the margins are great!") . There's a big FF apple cart out there just waiting to be upset.

TaoTeJared

I struggle to understand those sales positions, the 5D3 is much higher than the D800 which is 43rd! Maybe a sales tool...

It is not hard to understand if you look a few moments longer and realize that for each body, there are actually 2-5 positions due to body only, 18-55... and all the rest of the kits. Canon is almost double that (for lower models) since they have 2 names for each model (USA/rest of world). Amazon catches hell with multiple items with their stance on just giving unfiltered results. All Amazon really shows with camera sales is how older cameras (releases) are holding up in sales.

One of the things Nikon is for sure is steady. You can pretty much predict by the month what body will be coming out and most people upgrade on that time line. The D700 went 4 years before the long awaited update and most went the D800 route. Those that were holding back for something different, and many who were waiting for a D400 went the D600 route. That is 2-years of releases where most to be in a position to afford it, already plunked $2-3k down for the other bodies. This one is out of the blue, no one could plan, so most have already spent their budget. Then the D610 is out for pre-order which probably snagged the rest sitting on the fence. I think Nikon would have been smarter to build this up over a few months so people could anticipate and save up for it.

I'm actually really surprised by some who are passing - many of who said they would buy a FM style with a FX sensor in a heartbeat for years now.

sevencrossing

I think most, if not all, of us own a DSLR
I think the Df is aimed at those who don't

They will read the BLOGS by KR and the like
they will tell them
Full frame is best
mp is no longer relevant
go back to basics
a prime lens is essential

they are correct and the Df ticks all the boxes

yes the D800 is better but newbies will be told "it has too many mp" and is too complicated

KR is over the moon about this camera and he has not even tried it yet

moreorless

The first priority of any successful business is generating profit. It is profit that drives the ability to do R&D, innovate, and build new and exciting products that push the envelope. Nikon is struggling and their most recent financials indicate the struggle is likely to continue. Nikon is still profitable but not to the degree that bodes well for the immediate future in terms of R&D and innovation, and certainly not to the degree that would satisfy investors. Declining revenue and declining profits never do. The Df is not a product that will enhance the bottom line for Nikon. It is too expensive and too "niche" oriented to do that.

Nikon needs to partner with a major cell phone manufacturer and/or find a solution with a decent profit margin they can sell to the masses. Only when companies are doing well do they develop the kinds of products that feed our appetites. It is the financial freedom to do so that builds a reputation for cutting edge, ground breaking performance.

If Nikon could get some kind of worthwhile partnership(1 system mount on a phone/tablet?) it could help but the problem to me seems to be that its not just Nikon who are taking a hit, its everyone. That to me seems to point towards the contraction potentially being inevitable and in that situation I'd guess there something to be said for "keeping your head down".

You look at Nikon's releases this year and I'd argue most of them point towards maximising return on R&D, the D7100, the D610, the D5300 and the Df, none of them look like they likely cost a massive amount to devolp considering they use a lot of existing tech.

As far as the Df being a "crippled D4" I'd say its more a repurposed D4 sensor, the same low light abilities put to use in a street/travel camera rather than a more professional event/sport/wildlife one.

CEBlueclouds

Clearly the DF is targeted at a niche market....IMHO, Nikon's objective is not to cannibalise sales on any of its existing models (D4/800/610) but to bring out a new type of user. Price it significantly lower and then it starts to eat into D610 sales. At $2,750....it's close to the D800 but its specs does not make it a real threat . Make FPS significantly faster and then it begins to look like a mini D4. How large is this niche? time would tell (guess Nikon must have done some market research....I do hope so!)....Should Nikon be focusing its manufacturing capacity, marketing structures, R&D, etc on a DF to the detriment of other models?....again time would tell. So if the DF does not appeal to you...don't buy it...if it does and you can rationalise the price, buy it, post your pictures on PAD and be happy....

TaoTeJared

Because specs matter to a lot of people on this board. It has a sensor designed for journalists (high ISO and smaller files) that doesn't maximize IQ, yet it shoots slowly. Its second class AF struggles in the very light where it would take those high ISO photos, and it is expensive. We all know it is a d610 with a d4 sensor in a retro body. There is just no denying it. It's hard to rationalize buying it when you know that

@PitchBlack - I know you are not an amateur and are a very good photographer but your criticism of the DF are quite odd. I'm not sure what type of shooter you think this should be for or have missed the point of the system entirely. It's clear is was not designed to replace anything in Nikon's lineup. It's not for maga sports shooters (D4), it's not for commercial shooters or for anyone who needs huge resolution(D800). Those bases are covered. And in many ways it is a step up from the D600 with the sensor.

The question isn't which pro Nikon shooter this is directed at but what market it is. It fits that niche of shooter (street, environmental, ambient light, documentary, advanced amateur) who buys Fuji X100, X-pro1, Pani GFs, Oly EM5, who have been desiring a high performing FX sensor. The only way for that is the massive full sized DSLR. For that, it nails it. Size on the other hand is a bit large, but with so little being compromised, it is a pretty darn acceptable trade-off. The ability to use really old glass (non-ai or adapters) is great, some really like tactile controls. The AF is what the D3 basically had minus a few AF points (which it seems like some really do not understand what all those extra points do - or don't do) and will do fairly well even with kid-sport stuff and will be able to shoot well in bars and from street lights.

The mirrorless systems have large compromises with metering, AF, WB, FPS (with tracking). Oly's EM1 is still tested to be one of the fastest AF performers, but tests show it still lags behind a D3200. Some systems have huge FPS numbers which is impressive until you read they only can track 1-2 shots per second or just the first shot point is focused. The metering on the systems are not good - basically matrix or less matrix. WB - is horrid, Fuji's is decent, but not close to a DSLR. Knowing the D4 sensor, and the AF from the D600, the Df destroys these systems easily. The 2 big things for the mirrorless is the flange distance where you can use almost any old lens and the manual focusing/peeking. You can't do anything about the first, but the manual focus and ability of "peeking" will be interesting to see.

Sony's two new bodies will be interesting. It appears to me, they are dumping the "SLR" from their pro line and going all mirrorless (or maybe very soon). AF will be the key to those or pros, but they are cheaper, have the shorter flange distance and focus peeking. People with Leica glass will head that way. But from a standpoint of cost, that is still all new lenses to buy, and they are not cheap.

itsnotmeyouknow

But here lies the rub. A street camera needs to be able to either autofocus really well, in all lights, which the Df's AF will be less good than the D4/D800 or to be set up for manual focus. The lack of a killer autofocus or the ability to use a better focus screen has made this camera u/s for many pro level photographers. It is priced at pro level and specced at the bottom end of prosumer. Not good enough. It is too 'meh' to sit at this price level. If it had D4's AF and a decent aid for manual focus, then it would have been a winner for pros.

I'm afraid this very important miss means the camera is a miss. It is anything but pure photography. Especially if it does the film rewinding sound. The camera is too much of a compromise it just looks like a bastardised blend of an old camera and a large CSC. It doesn't really know what it is.

Elvishefer

It's hard to rationalize buying it when you know that

I would add, 'especially at that price' to complete the sentence.

I know the camera will sell. There will be people like Tao who buy it and love it because, let's face it, even as a D610 dressed up with a D4 sensor, the camera WILL NOT SUCK.

But for me, and I imagine a lot like me, who are not in any way interested in a retro body for the dials, nostalgia and whatnot, but were more interested in - and I hate to say it because I don't want to get into the ensuing D800 argument - D700 style replacement, the Df and its 'compromises' doesn't make sense.

I wanted a cheaper D4 sensor and by cheap I do not mean $3k, not when the D800 is so close in price.

As Seven says, when the price drops come into play I may look at the Df again but it won't be for looks, it will be a price-driven decision to get that D4 sensor.

People are very emotional about this camera which is great because it means we're all very enthusiastic about what Nikon is doing, despite our occasional grumblings.

I look forward to seeing our Df pics and I agree that paired with something like the 58 1.4 or 35 1.4 this camera will be a lot of fun (although with 77mm filter lenses I am not sure it will be as subtle a street shooter as people are making it out to be... so have fun lens collectors, there must be some that will shine on this body).

donaldejose

I don't have a D4 but do have a D600 and a D800. The D600 and D800 sensors are amazing! Great dynamic range at ISO 100 to ISO 400. I don't see any reason to want a D4 sensor in place of them except for the desire to shoot at ISO 3200 to ISO 6400. PitchBlack is correct; the D4 is best for the photojournalist and the sports shooter. Those who are shooting at ISO 100 through ISO 400 are served better by the sensors in the D600 and D800.

But I would have to say a Df could work well for a photojournalist who wants a body lighter than a D4, doesn't need or want video and likes the "classic photojournalist chrome/black camera look." Pair it with your preferred prime lens (35mm, 50mm or 85mm) or a moderate zoom (likely Nikon will soon convert a few other lenses to the retro look for the Df). Use a brown/tan canvas messenger bag type camera bag (carrying your modern laptop for post processing and e-mailing to the newspaper/magazine). Finally, add a D5100 16mp body as a lightweight backup body (or go 24mp with a D5200/D5300 body) and you can imagine yourself as a AP photojournalist from the 60's. If I were to play this part I would get my Df in chrome and look for a leather strap to put on it. Now that I think about it perhaps that is exactly what I will do in a few years when I can pick one up for half price as something to just have fun with!

TaoTeJared

But here lies the rub. A street camera needs to be able to either autofocus really well, in all lights, which the Df's AF will be less good than the D4/D800 or to be set up for manual focus. The lack of a killer autofocus or the ability to use a better focus screen has made this camera u/s for many pro level photographers. It is priced at pro level and specced at the bottom end of prosumer....

No camera exists that meets those demands but a massive D4 and the Canon pro 18mp body. In the street shooter/ smaller body market, Nothing exists like that. The lack of interchangeable Focus screens did surprise me a bit - but that didn't change anything from what we really have now. I am not a fan of manual focusing on any DSLR.

@TTJ: But the D4 sensor *is* an inferior sensor to the D600 sensor except at high ISO. Leaving aside the megapixel count, it has less color depth, lower dynamic range and isn't as good at recovering the shadows at lower ISOs as the D600 sensor.

By far most people are buying this camera for Higher iso shooting. For studio/controlled environment the D800 is the top and really the D610 is great as well, but for street work, it's average. Only the MP count and ability to crop saves them. donaldejose is correct, from iso 100-400 there is miminal difference or the 24/36mp win for sure. Above ISO 400, the D4 sensor is better than either the D610 or the D800 In every which way. More color, more DR, and being able to get the right exposure than having to do workarounds in shooting and recovering in post.

To save people time from searching: (Dx0 Mark)

TaoTeJared

... Pair it with your preferred prime lens (35mm, 50mm or 85mm) or a moderate zoom (likely Nikon will soon convert a few other lenses to the retro look for the Df). Use a brown/tan canvas messenger bag type camera bag (carrying your modern laptop for post processing and e-mailing to the newspaper/magazine).

This is how I shoot for non-work.
Here is an issue though, I can not edit my D800 files on my iPad - they are too big! Forget my iPhone. Even at basic jpeg settings it can't handle them, or barely. Printing on mobile printers is bad as well. 16mp everything still can move well. I'm also trying to do some event work and print on spot and the D800 files are a huge problem, even the D600 file trials I have done are an issue. Jpeg basic looses too much color and jpeg fine are too large. It is just too much data where it is not needed. I have been using my X100 sine the files work, and it is better than my D300 at iso 400-1000 where this shooting is landing at. It is really frustrating to say the least. Others have done similar, but at a price tag of $20k. I'm trying to do it for under $5k, and I'm getting there but the camera is one of the hanging points as I don't really want to rely on used D700 or D3 bodies with unknown histories.

There is an upside to big MP sensors, but there is are real downside as well.

donaldejose

TTJ: great graphics! and very good point about printing on-site. One question: as to on-site events printing I would think you could consider a DX sensor such as the one on the D7000 or D5100 if you don't need high ISO. I have found they are adequate to at least ISO 800 and a refurbished D5100 body should be quite cheap.

By the way, I just printed some 16 x 24 inch scenic photos taken with my D90 (I play with old bodies occasionally just for fun) and was pleasantly surprised how well the 12mp sensor held up. Of course, they were shot at ISO 200. As long as you can keep ISO down I would think a 16mp DX sensor would produce adequate prints on-site.

WestEndBoy

It is a Nikon FE with digital insides. I get it. I love shooting my D800 with the 50mm 1.2 Manual Focus lens in M-mode. I would be even happier if it was attached to the Df and I was able to fiddle with those dials.

To me, the only thing missing from the Df is a special edition "D" lens. Luckily, Ds are still available. Well....maybe I would like 24mp and it is probably about $500 overpriced. But I will not complain too much on these points.

Will I buy it, probably not. I want the Macro 200mm F4 with the R1 speedlight first, then a Gitzko explorer tripod, then an Eizo monitor more and I just spent $7,000 which is my budget for almost 3 years. Then if Nikon has a Leica equivalent with the short flange distance, FX and form factor, I will be all over that. If not, then if they have a 45-50mm <=1.4 professional grade lens, I will be all over that. If not on both points, then I will think about it which would be easier if my above nitpicking was satisfied..

So much to buy and not enough money.

heartyfisher

Hi all, A bit late on to the DF discussions by me ! anyway.. I was not very excited by the Df at the beginning.

I have been here long enough that some of you know that I have been waiting for a replacement for my Fuji s5 pro. which was to be the D400.. and I got the D7000 as a stop gap.

The more I look into it the Df is the replacement camera I have been waiting for. i will wait for the price to drop a bit but other than that for me and my interests, its in almost every way a significant upgrade from my S5pro. Every other camera except the D4 for me has only matched or was a downgrade.

1) About triple the FPS . not that FPS was an issue for me. as I am a single shot shooter preferring to time the shot rather than go burst mode.
2) One area of photography I like but felt very restricted was evening street and theatre and event photography. The Df will open that up for me with a that superb high ISO capability !
3) that ISO dial !!! finally easy to change and easy to see what ISO i have set. same for the shutter dial ! with my afd lenses i get the Aperture rings !! for a nice physical way of setting the 5 main modifiable parameters, ISO, Shutter Speed, Aperture, Zoom, Focus.
4) I had a split prism focusing screen on my S5 Pro. I am sure I will be getting one for the Df !! Its great for the type of things I take ie macro and night photography. I have always reverted to and am comfortable with manually focusing when AF fails.. for me these situation occur often in macro, dark areas and insect in flight. Having said that I rather be lazy and would have hoped for the 51 AF version of the D800 mainly for the -2ev capability. but I can live with that.
5) The colours (tones and DR and colour reproduction) from the D4 was the only nikon camera that in my eyes surpassed the S5pro.

I must admit that the D600/D610 was a very close fit. and it would have easily tipped the balance for me if they only had the D800's AF system in it like the D7100. similarly the D800 but the weaker D800 high ISO capability and price made me hesitate. but the Df with the ISO dial and the D4 sensor is a huge plus for me.

I am happy to wait 4 mths for the price to pull back a bit and see if there are any issues. then its most likely a Df for me !! (yes I dont think a D400 will arrive. if it arrives I will need to rethink!! LOL !)

tc88

@TTJ, I don't know how the other measurements are defined, but believe the SNR graph is measured per pixel. Fundemantally you can always combine multiple pixels to represent one and there is really not much difference compared to building a single bigger pixel. So if you down sample the 36MP of D800 to 16MP, the SNR curve should improve and overlap that of D4. That's why the low light high ISO value of all 3 sensors from DXO test are all about the same because I would imagine that is defined as reaching a same threshold set with a given SNR at a given pixel density.

Of course, Dxomark never published exactly how the measurements are done, so I can only roughly guess.