I think this really sums up the reason why the Df got as much hate as it did, it fell into a sweet spot where several groups of insecure people were likely to take a pop at it...
1.Mirrorless users - Up until now digital camera's sold on looks and reduction in size have been almost entirely mirrorless, a DSLR looking to do the same will obviously draw the ire of insecure users. Strange how the likes of F-stoppers didn't seem to care much about hipsters buying camera's for looking before the Df.
2.DSLR users - Insecure users on the DSLR side of the debate have long argued their preference for the handling modern DSLR's give, large grips and an interface via control wheels with shift buttons and a top plate LCD.
3.Canon users - Any Nikon release will get some criticism from insecure Canon users, the same being true of any Canon release from insecure Nikon users. That the camera in question is very different from any existing Canon product makes this more extreme.
A few comments I'd make on the review would be that I'd disagree that the Df offers no size saving compared to the D600. Its more of less the same in terms of height and width but depth wise your talking a significantly smaller profile, without the large grip your potentially talking space for an extra lens in a kit bag while traveling. Being a DSLR as well its actually a camera I'd consider taking traveling without needing to worry about constant battery changes/charging.
In terms of controls obviously the dials wouldn't be to everyone's taste but personally I think Nikon took the correct route in making them possible to override. If you want to stick to using the shutter speed dial that's perfectly possible, as is shooting only in shutter priority or full manual or using a pre G lens for aperture control. Indeed my main criticism of the Df is that it doesn't seem like you get do this with ISO. The X-T1 not offering the ability to at least shift shutter speed via a front control wheel to me makes it far less effective at doing double duty as a more action focused camera. Equally you can't get any kind of meter readout on the X-T1 from above because it lacks an LCD.
Talking of the X-t1 I think the Df makes a lot more sense in marketing terms when viewed in relation to it. Unlike the rest of the mirrorless market that has IMHO focused mostly on upgrading compact users or DSLR users shifting there entire system across to a smaller alternative I think Fuji has really targeted the second camera market, that is DSLR users buying a smaller retro style body to use along side it. The Df is IMHO Nikon's attempt to get in on some of these second camera business, it doesn't offer as much size saving but is still clearly smaller than something like a D800/D700 or a D3/D4. The massive advantage it does offer though is not having to invest in a second system of lenses, you look at the cost of say the X-T1 with the 23mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.2 and your talking several hundred dollars more than the Df which you can use your existing F-mount lenses on.
You can add another group to hate the Df there as well, Nikon users who've already bought into the Fuji system.
1.Mirrorless users - Up until now digital camera's sold on looks and reduction in size have been almost entirely mirrorless, a DSLR looking to do the same will obviously draw the ire of insecure users. Strange how the likes of F-stoppers didn't seem to care much about hipsters buying camera's for looking before the Df.
2.DSLR users - Insecure users on the DSLR side of the debate have long argued their preference for the handling modern DSLR's give, large grips and an interface via control wheels with shift buttons and a top plate LCD.
3.Canon users - Any Nikon release will get some criticism from insecure Canon users, the same being true of any Canon release from insecure Nikon users. That the camera in question is very different from any existing Canon product makes this more extreme.
A few comments I'd make on the review would be that I'd disagree that the Df offers no size saving compared to the D600. Its more of less the same in terms of height and width but depth wise your talking a significantly smaller profile, without the large grip your potentially talking space for an extra lens in a kit bag while traveling. Being a DSLR as well its actually a camera I'd consider taking traveling without needing to worry about constant battery changes/charging.
In terms of controls obviously the dials wouldn't be to everyone's taste but personally I think Nikon took the correct route in making them possible to override. If you want to stick to using the shutter speed dial that's perfectly possible, as is shooting only in shutter priority or full manual or using a pre G lens for aperture control. Indeed my main criticism of the Df is that it doesn't seem like you get do this with ISO. The X-T1 not offering the ability to at least shift shutter speed via a front control wheel to me makes it far less effective at doing double duty as a more action focused camera. Equally you can't get any kind of meter readout on the X-T1 from above because it lacks an LCD.
Talking of the X-t1 I think the Df makes a lot more sense in marketing terms when viewed in relation to it. Unlike the rest of the mirrorless market that has IMHO focused mostly on upgrading compact users or DSLR users shifting there entire system across to a smaller alternative I think Fuji has really targeted the second camera market, that is DSLR users buying a smaller retro style body to use along side it. The Df is IMHO Nikon's attempt to get in on some of these second camera business, it doesn't offer as much size saving but is still clearly smaller than something like a D800/D700 or a D3/D4. The massive advantage it does offer though is not having to invest in a second system of lenses, you look at the cost of say the X-T1 with the 23mm 1.4 and 56mm 1.2 and your talking several hundred dollars more than the Df which you can use your existing F-mount lenses on.
You can add another group to hate the Df there as well, Nikon users who've already bought into the Fuji system.
Upvote
0
