I just checked a few minutes ago. Canon's 5DIII body and their 6D kit are in the top 10; the 6D body and the 5DIII kit are in the top 20. You have to drop down to #39 this morning to find a Nikon full frame on the list (the DF). It's absolutely front-page news that a camera body that lists for more than $3,000 can be outselling $500 cameras. And, it's equally newsworthy that they are significantly outselling a newly released, highly anticipated and much-hyped camera.
Not really. The Nikon Df is IMHO a mistake. A desperate mistake.
It's another option
. It's a catering tool. It helps them cater to a specific, and yes possibly more niche, group of photographers. Nikon needs to do something. They make great products, but they are missing something somewhere, and even after some two decades, they haven't been able to topple the Canon beast. I applaud Nikon for thinking outside the box, even if that means thinking backwards a bit. At least they are demonstrating an interest in an increasingly common request from true blue stills photographers who want a camera built specifically just for them, without "any of that video crap."
I fully understand the request. I am not sure the request matters these days...R&D budgets aren't going to stop investing in video research, and creating a camera without the video features is actually probably less costly. Ironically, it seems to end up being a win/win in the end, possibly cheaper for the manufacturer to make, and more appealing to the most die-hard stills photographers.