Off Brand: Nikon Announces the Df

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,032
2,979
J.R. said:
Aglet said:
This new DF actually looks like a camera design I would ENJOY using, although I'd prefer d800 guts to d4 guts in mine. I LIKE those manual knobs and buttons. They're unambiguous, you can adjust them easily by feel, even with gloves on or while the camera is still powered OFF.

The Df looks like an imaging INSTRUMENT, not a black box of wonders with various goodies buried in menus. The Df is very appealing to the photogs I know because it's causing a more emotional response with them. We don't NEED a Df, we WANT a Df. (or something just like it in the lens mount of your choice)

My discussion with a few friends from the local photo club who are Nikon shooters leads me to only one conclusion. This camera is polarizing opinions one way or the other. Some people love it while some find it infinitely ugly.

I'm not sure how any real Nikon aficionado could be remotely interested in the Df. Of course, I'm basing that statement on the Nikon aficionados here on CR, and the fact that the Df has well over a stop less DR than the cheaper D800 or the much cheaper D610.

Sporgon said:
I honestly don't think Canon will feel the need to produce a Df because their dSLR design hasn't gone off the rails like Nikon.

+1 If you can't beat 'em, go play somewhere else.

Df = desperate futility
Df = ******* to failure
 

J.R.

EOS 5D Mark IV
Jan 13, 2013
1,749
0
neuroanatomist said:
J.R. said:
Aglet said:
This new DF actually looks like a camera design I would ENJOY using, although I'd prefer d800 guts to d4 guts in mine. I LIKE those manual knobs and buttons. They're unambiguous, you can adjust them easily by feel, even with gloves on or while the camera is still powered OFF.

The Df looks like an imaging INSTRUMENT, not a black box of wonders with various goodies buried in menus. The Df is very appealing to the photogs I know because it's causing a more emotional response with them. We don't NEED a Df, we WANT a Df. (or something just like it in the lens mount of your choice)

My discussion with a few friends from the local photo club who are Nikon shooters leads me to only one conclusion. This camera is polarizing opinions one way or the other. Some people love it while some find it infinitely ugly.

I'm not sure how any real Nikon aficionado could be remotely interested in the Df. Of course, I'm basing that statement on the Nikon aficionados here on CR, and the fact that the Df has well over a stop less DR than the cheaper D800 or the much cheaper D610.

True ... a number of people are gushing with praise but I doubt whether they will put money where their mouth is :p
 

Sporgon

5% of gear used 95% of the time
CR Pro
Those of us that live in the real world know competition is a good thing for the consumer.

Let's just hope the creation of the DF wasn't suggested by the same market research gurus who suggested replacing the 12mp D700 with a 36mp camera ::)
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,032
2,979
Sporgon said:
Those of us that live in the real world know competition is a good thing for the consumer.

Let's just hope the creation of the DF wasn't suggested by the same market research gurus who suggested replacing the 12mp D700 with a 36mp camera ::)

It's like a tired boxer weaving around, trying to avoid that knockout punch. Waterproof MILC. Retro. Try every corner of the ring (niche market) you can reach.
 

Tiosabas

EOS M50
Jul 19, 2011
36
0
If Canon were ever going to release a retro, now would be a great time and undercut the Df by few hundred. No one can deny that there is a market for these retro style cameras. I'm sure the Canon accountants are hearing ching ching sounds looking at all the hype that has been generated recently with smaller/lighter/retro offerings. This camera has made all the headlines in the last week or two. And Fuji are doing great with their line of retro cams. I see them more as a second camera, a smaller lighter option when you dont want to carry around the big black DSLR. Stick one lens on it and you are out for the day. This is were the Df fails miserably. Its as big as any full frame DSLR and as expensive so why bother? It doesnt provide enough differenciation from a modern DSLR. I would buy a Canon retro style or mirrorless only if it was smaller, lighter and took EF lenses without an adapter(adapters just add bulk).
 

Rick

EOS 90D
Dec 30, 2012
105
0
USA
I am confused by CR's implication

I for one would scream bloody murder if Canon released such a camera while its camera lineup still lacks an answer to the D800 (or A7r). Besides, the absence of video doesn't make the DF a photographer's camera, least not a 21st century photographer. :)

I don't begrudge enthusiasts their retro camera. Leica and Hassleblad do vanity stuff all of the time. But, let's get back on message, Canon, with a full complement of 35mm solutions before getting into the vanity market.
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,032
2,979
Tiosabas said:
I would buy a Canon retro style or mirrorless only if it was smaller, lighter and took EF lenses without an adapter(adapters just add bulk).

Taking EF lenses without an adapter means maintaining a 44mm flange focal distance - so you can kiss one dimension of 'smaller' goodbye, which is why I doub't we'll see such a camera.

OTOH, you've just descirbed the SL1, except it's neither mirrorless nor retro. ;)
 

neuroanatomist

I post too Much on Here!!
CR Pro
Jul 21, 2010
25,032
2,979
dilbert said:
Has anyone bought the SL1?

It's above the D800E on Amazon's sales ranking. Imagine that...a dinky little dSLR with such poor DR outselling the camera with the best IQ of any camera currently available. People just don't have their priorities straight when it comes to buying cameras, do they? ::)

FWIW, last time I walked through a 'wholesale club' store, the pallet of SL1 kits was almost empty.
 

Tiosabas

EOS M50
Jul 19, 2011
36
0
neuroanatomist said:
Tiosabas said:
I would buy a Canon retro style or mirrorless only if it was smaller, lighter and took EF lenses without an adapter(adapters just add bulk).

Taking EF lenses without an adapter means maintaining a 44mm flange focal distance - so you can kiss one dimension of 'smaller' goodbye, which is why I doub't we'll see such a camera.

OTOH, you've just descirbed the SL1, except it's neither mirrorless nor retro. ;)

Thanks I knew there some constraint like that. Actually I think the RX1/r still still the best size.weight/image quality solution as a second "go anywhere" camera. But who is going to spend 3300Eur on a second camera? Such a pity about the price but it might drop when the A7 is available.
 

Harv

EOS RP
Jul 26, 2010
283
3
www.harveyg.smugmug.com
neuroanatomist said:
tolusina said:
Um, can't really compare Df to D610, Df doesn't have D610 guts, it's got D4 guts at less than half the price.

You seem to be one of those folks for whom "sensor" is synonymous with "camera." Do you make camera purchase decisions based solely on DxOMark Sensor Scores? FYI, there's more inside a camera than the sensor. Let's look, shall we?

D4 Df D610 Like D4? Like D610?
Sensor 16 MP 16 MP 24 MP ✓
AF points 51 (15 cross) 39 (9 cross) 39 (9 cross) ✓
AF sensitivity -2 EV -1 EV -1 EV ✓
Metering sensor 91,000 pixel 2,016 pixel 2,016 pixel ✓
Max shutter 1/8000 s 1/4000 s 1/4000 s ✓
X-sync 1/250 s 1/200 s 1/200 s ✓
Exposure Comp ±5 EV ±3 EV ±3 EV ✓

Look at that list, and explain how the 'guts' of the Df are more like the D4 than the D600/610...

Allow me to repeat my earlier statement, with a few modifications: What Nikon has done here is analogous to taking a modern, powerful, fuel-efficient engine, (the D4 sensor), handicapping that engine with a three speed transmission (the D600/610 AF sensor, metering sensor, shutter assembly, etc.)...putting it into a Subaru Brat...and slapping on a Mercedes price sticker.

Nicely put.

Unfortunately, there are people in this world who don't want to be confused with facts when their mind is already made up.
 
Apr 19, 2011
4,761
1
It does seem a bit curious that they it delivers half fps less than the 5D3 despite deliver like 7MP less MP per image this late in the game. And the price seems high enough it could have supported a 7fps at least mirror box, you'd think. Then again, removing video probably doesn't lower the price at all, maybe even raises it, so maybe if they had put in video they could've afforded to bump it to 7-8fps :D.

The sensor is overall better than the one in the 5D3, better at ISO100 (although not to the degree the D800/D600 etc. are as the DR improvement is maybe only like half, although it's still nice, and this time you end up with less MP at the same time, so in some scenarios it might work out a little worse) and at ISO6400 where it has more DR.

Still it now not merely has worse video than 5D3 native video and radically worse than ML fixed 5D3 video it doesn't even have it all.

I sort of feel like a 7-8fps D800 with improved video would've been more exciting and put more pressure on Canon. (unless you live at the very high ISOs, then this is a little bit better)
 

7enderbender

EOS RP
Feb 17, 2011
644
5
Boston, MA
JoeyJonaitis said:
As a hybrid shooter, I am a little bias. But WHY would nikon make this camera have no video feature? The fact that it is missing video is what makes nikon, and ANY camera manufacturer lose my business and respect. At that point they are not trying to make the best camera they can, or push the market. They are just creating a gimic-ish product that WILL sell, because most people, don't know any better.


I think they're going after the market segment that wants a Leica but never pulled the trigger because of the even more insane cost. And I can totally relate.

Where they miss it after some more reading is that the viewfinder is not suited for manual focus (just like all modern DSLRs unfortunately - at least not in the way one would expect).

I would be perfectly happy to give up my gear for a pure, manual focus, manual dials full frame camera with good optics and good handling. No video, no gizmos, nothing that gets in the way of just making photographs.

I know this is not for everyone. And it's nothing we can expect from a Japanese company probably. So saving for a Leica it still is.
 

lilmsmaggie

EOS RP
Mar 1, 2013
231
0
Ah, ah, ah ... Don't let the folks over at APUG, Large Format Photographers forum or RangeFinder forum hear you say that.

Them's fighting words ...Lol

Not to mention all those Leica and Holga/lomography film shooters out there.


mikea said:
Unfortunately, whereas you can still use a classic car, a film camera now has little practical use.
 

tolusina

EOS RP
Mar 1, 2012
795
15
Promature said:
tolusina said:
Um, er, only 50 some posts, I've drawn Neuro's ire already, oh my......

Because you seem to lack the ability to argue with facts, and so you argue with emotion. This will not get you far, except with the media.

So the F-150 and Mustang both have a 3.7L V6. Heck, the same 2.0T I4 is found in the Focus ST, the Fusion, and the Lincoln MKZ. Would you say they are the same car? Does the package surrounding the engine define the purpose of the car? Just because the sensor (motor) is the same, doesn't mean the package is the same.
Thanks so much for making my point.
In this automotive example, the 'heart' (I should have posted "heart" rather than "guts" above) is the same even though the vehicle and features differ. The 3.7 has the same combustion efficiency regardless of what vehicle it is installed in, ditto the 2.0T.
To further this Ford automotive analogy, The MKZ can be had with a 2.0T or a 3.7, same package with similar features, different heart.

A similar analogy works when comparing the Df and the D4, same heart, different features.
Comparing the Df with the D610 reveals similar fearures with a far different heart as in the MKZ analogy.
---
Am I arguing with emotion as you state? I think not.
---
neuroanatomist said:
to suggest falling back on manual focus as a routine practice makes about as much sense as recommending that everyone use an abacus to fill out their tax return.
Gee, sorry for you that falling back to manual focus makes abacus sense to you. To me, and possibly to many others it makes perfect and practical sense.
Any time any machine fails to respond as and when I expect, I appreciate when said machine allows me to take control and achieve the end result I expect and desire.

Are you saying you'd prefer lens manufacturers reduce price by leaving off manual focus rings? If not, pray tell why the hostility regarding practice to the point of expertise of manual focusing skills?
---
neuroanatomist said:
.......it's kinda nice not to have to burn the rest of the roll, or rewind carefully to leave a tab exposed, when wanting to change ISO speed. ....
I quite miss doing just that, I do not missing having to do that.
---
neuroanatomist said:
tolusina said:
Um, er, only 50 some posts, I've drawn Neuro's ire already, oh my......

It's not the quantity, but rather, the quality...or more precisely, the lack thereof, that I find annoying.
That ^ comment is unnecessary, un-called for and offensive.
---
Back on topic, I think the Df is absolutely gorgeous, the concept brilliant. Too bad it's a Nikon.




.
 
It's an 'okay' looking camera. It might even be better looking than the Sony A7(R) cameras. Maybe. But the Sony's have much better specs, do video AND are less expensive. Am I missing something?

I agree. If it were an APS-C sensor and costing around $1200, it would be a fun and cute camera to have. Even with FF, it's incredibly overpriced. $1800 tops.

Sorry Nikon. Thanks for trying at least. :'(
 

Aglet

EOS 5D Mark IV
Feb 26, 2012
1,728
15
AB
dilbert said:
Just wait until your fore finger needs to reach up and press the shutter button...

color me different then, I prefer a top-deck SR button to the forward angled ones near the front of grips of most cameras today.
However, until I wrap my mitts around a real Df I can't say for sure how well this particular model will fit my hand. Various photos I've seen makes me think there's a good chance I will like it.

What I'm already sure I won't like is apparently (somewhere I read that) the little PASM mode dial needs to be LIFTED to be turned! If true, that's daft!
The button locks for the other dials should be easy enough to manage with one finger but it's gonna be next to impossible to change mode without taking that camera away from your eye and using both hands with some effort. It should just be a stiffly detented click-stop movement with PASM indicator in the viewfinder. I don't like how this part works, I regularly switch between A and M. This would slow me down a bit too much.
 
K

Kwanon

Guest
This is the ugliest camera i have ever seen. it looks like a cheap nikon from every angle and the "classic" parts are really ugly and don't go together with the modern camera parts and doesn't even look classic or retro.

I really hope canon doesn't go with this design trend ever..

If it had a full metal body similar to the old ones this would be what it was meant to be.
It would still be ugly though.

Leica's are supermodels and the nikon df is a 60 year old grandma putting on some makeup and entering a beauty pageant.