I've tried it at the Paris photo show.
I've learnt the "photo" on Nikon F ; Nikon F2 ; Nikon FM ; Nikon FE. I currently shoot Canon (of course....) and Leica. You actually control the speed of a Leica with a wheel. With the DF in my hands i felt "home sweet home". These movements are for me more than natural. Get the camera, frame your shot, adjust exposure with your index finger if needed and press the shutter once the speed is the good one. It only require a few time, it is in fact really fast.
That's definitely not a 1Dx alike or a 5D3-hostile as I've read on this forum. These first two cameras are designed for speed with a beast of an AF and give you a total fast control on all of your exposure-data (ISO ; f/ ; speed). You can, as a matter of fact, alternate between strong backlight, very bright and really dark contexts in a very few moments. That's what you must have when you're a photojournalist working on lot of celebs entering and leaving a restaurant at noon on a sunny day. But when photographing family events and any regular situation without drastic exposure variations and whithout fast moving subjects, you don't need that speed-abilities. That's why Canon sells the 6D so well. And I don't know the Nikon-line but I think that the brand new DF is suited for that kind of events.
Once your aperture is set to define your "atmosphere" (f/1,x for shallow DOF ; f/4 for focus assurance ; f/5,6-f/8-and-more for everything in focus), the ISO adjusted, changing the speed is fast IF needed. You don't change your ISO that often. I find that's a great mistake not to offer an aperture ring on the dedicated-50mm. It would have been an extraordinary combo if only....
Moreover i consider it is extremely over-priced. People paying 3000€ for a camera usually don't pay a lot of attention to the look of the camera. They want performances, reliability and great UI.
(1) Professionals don't wanna look fancy, that's for a lot of them, a nightmare : fancy is not related to serious in most people's mind. When people hire a photographer for corporate events for their company they want him to "look pro". They are paying, and they often pay a lot of money, they don't want him to look fancy-funny-with-a-so-cuty-vintage-camera. Nevertheless, I can imagine that there is more place for experiment in wedding photography cause it's more related to a creation-arty-world.
(2) On the other hand, there's the great amateur, "expert" or however you call him. He enjoys a lot photography, he loves it and enjoys hearing "hey, here comes the professional" when he meets his friends. He wants to look like a pro in a discreet way. He likes how a big black dusky camera looks. It is just like his friends pop-up-f/5.6-lens-kitted-camera but bigger. And he likes that. Different but not so much. He's really involved in photography. Seriously.
He usually shoots great pictures, is happy with his gear and he just wonders if the next camera will be that great in ISO to change his actual one or if it is really a good idea to buy another bizarre-prime.
(3) On another hand, there's the regular guy. He likes taking pictures. He know some stuff like ISO's (he remembers that he used to buy 400 ones ten years ago) and shoots his family smiling, his friends and the great landscapes he sees when traveling or going in the land on sunday to have a lunch with the in-laws. He usually shoots "P-mode".
He's related to the guys who likes the "photography" and is in a more "arty-approach" but doesn't involves that much. He shoots some good pics, have a "his-name-photography" facebook fan page and loves when people tells him that he should become a pro because his "sunset is amazing". He wants very sharp pictures even though he doesn't really get why some pics are and some aren't.
(4) And then there's everyone else. People only wanting to get souvenirs of events, who doesn't care at all about IQ. Their phone is the perfect tool cause pics are shared at the same time with all their friends, mates and family. That's the only thing they care about. There is also the kind people buying a 100D or 450D because "having a DSLR is so cool" which is quite the same. They shoot the green-box-mode.
I'm not saying that one are better than the other. I just note what come through my mind while writing this post. There is obviously a lot of different kinds of photographers, different way of seriously enjoying photography, of making a living of it.... But i consider that these are the biggest and most general "categories".
I think that people who could be interested in a serious-and-retro-super-cool-looking cameras are the third category of people. But they don't have 3000€ to spend for that. That's why i consider that it is overpriced a lot.
I think that people buying 3000€ cameras will buy it whatever it looks. It they like how it looks, it's a good point but not a decisive argument. They may hesitate between the 2200€ and the 5000€ one but they are wondering if they really need the 61-points-AF or the 14fps ability, not which one is the best looking.
Well. When I had it in my hands, ive enjoyed it. All the wheels are not so bad to deal with, you just have to get used. I d'ont think it is that bad, really not : unlike what the teasers shows, it is fast and easy to change the speed via a wheel.
The AF (on a 28 1.8, the new 50mm was not available) seemed to be quite fast and accurate. There was no memory card so i was unable to really appreciate the high-iso-IQ. I was more interested in the UI and i've been satisfied although i found it to appear a bit "cheap". It ain't solid metal like an old NikonFM...
I won't spend 3000€ for the DF, never. It would have been 1000€, yeah, why not, I've a dozens of old (and really old) Nikkor. It would have been a digital-manual-focus-camera, juste like my Leicas. But it's not for me....and I don't really get why people would actually buy it if it ain't that better than the D610.