Teasers are over: new retro Nikon FF Body finally outed

[max]

so hype is over... now bring on the Fuji X100FF!! 8) 8)

 

[Loswr]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody has talked about resolution. More living proof, that the Nikon D800 is so successful it makes plenty of the Canon users frustrated...

By the way, this DF looks incredibly lovely. The only drawback is the price tag...

The D800 is so successful that the 5DIII is outselling it by a wide margin, and resolution is so important that Nikon builds on the 'success' of their 36 MP camera by bringing out a retrocam with a paltry 16 MP. None of that frustrates me in the least... :

I'm really astonished that you overlooked the point...

Which point? That the design is blocky and overly complicated, or that it's overpriced?

In fact, I disagree that it's overpriced. This camera isn't about form or function, it's about appearance and perception. If it's priced too low, it won't be perceived as the status symbol Nikon clearly intends it to be. Of course, car makers seem to grasp that middle-aged men want faster and sleeker phallic symbols, whereas Nikon apparently thinks boxy and old-fashioned is a selling point.

Here we go again..... another slap in the face from Nikon
I wonder when Canon will wake up???...... if they do.

LOL. Canon will 'wake up' when Nikon starts taking away their market share. Can you honestly say you think this camera is going to help them do that? : : :

 

[Lichtgestalt]

Here we go again..... another slap in Nikons face.

i was so free to correct your sentence.

by the way what is your signature for?
it sends me to my shutterstock account, so something is not working as you expect i guess.

 

[seekthedragon]

Which point?

Do I really have to explain? Then I do it really slowly, so you may understand.

A says: "I wish my D800s had this kind of control setup."
B answers: "Interesting that you would change your 36mp D800 for a 16mp DF."

B's answer has nothing to do with A's statement.

Scenario 1: B is simply mentally disabled, and does not understand A. In this case, I really sorry.
Scenario 2: B is so frustrated by something, that he overlooks statements including the D800, and tries to form an answer which proves the camera's utter uselessness, even if doing so is irrelevant or meaningless.

That was my point.

The sad thing that these scenarios may also apply to our conversation.

 

[AvTvM]

The more I see of this camera, the less I like it: I find it very ugly -too big and lumpy and wanting in its deign philosophy.

Even Nikon doesn't seem to be sure about returning to an interface based upon dedicated marked dials, so they provide both. Pure photography? My arse! This is pure marketing gimmickry that has actually complicated the control interface through duplication.

This is a camera that claims to address the issue of over-complication in modern DSLRs, but actually does nothing of the sort, other than removing video. So video over-complicates a modern DSLR, but all the in-camera retouching options, a 39 point AF system with umpteen different tracking modes, banks of custom setting, etc. That's all fine it seems!

If you really want "Pure Photography", you need to make pure design decisions: you must decide what the camera can do and what it cannot. The DF attempts to be simple and yet lose none of the sophisticated features of a modern autofocus digital SLR camera; it fails because our expectations of what this constitutes a modern DSLR, lead to a design that is inherently complicated.

I fully agree with almost everything you say. Except, that "no video" is an absolutely necessary step in getting to a "pure photography camera ... without clutter and disctractions."
Unfortunately, Nikon did not go the rest of the way.

Nikon wanted too much
1. compatibility not only for older AI lenses (like any other "better" Nikon DSLR) but also for those really old dog Non-AI lenses ... instead of leaving these uncoated, unsuited for digital photography clunkers alone! They are strictly for use with film cameras or as deco objects or as collector's items. Or all three. But nothing else.
2. "Retro-UI" befitting a manual focus, aperture auto only classic SLR (FM/FE) and on top of that a modern UI to control a "very bland and uninspired" DSLR. Now there are 7 (!) wheels on that camera, plus numerous buttons and switches. Not well thought out at all. In the end, that's what makes the Df complicated rather than easy and really "silly" - as dpreview puts it.

Nikon gave it too little
* instead of buidling it on the D610 chassis, they should have started with D800 chassis, electronics, battery and most importantly AF-system. Then put the D4 sensor in it, if they really got a huge surplus of those left over. And then retro-style the package in a much more elegant, restrained, pure and straightforward way.
* retro- design should not have precluded inclusion of WiFi (and possibly NFC - for wireless remote control and GPS) plus master-trigger pop-up flash hidden in that huge viewfinder bump

Then Nikon could have easily sold it at 3k (body only, forget about that 50/1.8). It would have given them a meaningful and potentially attractive addition to their DSLR line-up:
* fast/reportage D4 on top (max fps), not cannibalized by D800 or Df
* Df for medium res/low light stuff, medium speed, WEDDING etc. and "retro-fans"
* D800/E for hi res stuff - landscape/studio stuff
* D610 for budget restrained hobbyists willing to put up with a marketing cripple

But ... they botched it.

 

[RLPhoto]

The more I look at this camera the more it looks cluttered. It should only have dials for aperture, shutter speed and ISO to keep it clean looking. Let the rest be buried in to nikons horrid menu system because after all this is a "purest" camera. :

 

[Sporgon]

Which point?

Do I really have to explain? Then I do it really slowly, so you may understand.

A says: "I wish my D800s had this kind of control setup."
B answers: "Interesting that you would change your 36mp D800 for a 16mp DF."

B's answer has nothing to do with A's statement.

Scenario 1: B is simply mentally disabled, and does not understand A. In this case, I really sorry.
Scenario 2: B is so frustrated by something, that he overlooks statements including the D800, and tries to form an answer which proves the camera's utter uselessness, even if doing so is irrelevant or meaningless.

That was my point.

The sad thing that these scenarios may also apply to our conversation.

B here.

A actually wrote: The Df will Dfinitely have to seduce me with the ergonomics and overall feel to make me trade a D800 for it tho

C simply made a quotation out of context, or just the wrong quotation, or maybe was just on the wrong forum.

D pointed out a few salient facts which C took offence to.

Scenario 1: B is simply mentally disabled, - Guilty as charged: B frequents a forum where C is a member.

Scenario 2: B is so frustrated by something, Correct, B was a Nikon shooter for 25 years and is greatly saddened to see the b******s that Nikon is making with its FF cameras.

 

[traveller]

The more I see of this camera, the less I like it: I find it very ugly -too big and lumpy and wanting in its deign philosophy.

Even Nikon doesn't seem to be sure about returning to an interface based upon dedicated marked dials, so they provide both. Pure photography? My arse! This is pure marketing gimmickry that has actually complicated the control interface through duplication.

This is a camera that claims to address the issue of over-complication in modern DSLRs, but actually does nothing of the sort, other than removing video. So video over-complicates a modern DSLR, but all the in-camera retouching options, a 39 point AF system with umpteen different tracking modes, banks of custom setting, etc. That's all fine it seems!

If you really want "Pure Photography", you need to make pure design decisions: you must decide what the camera can do and what it cannot. The DF attempts to be simple and yet lose none of the sophisticated features of a modern autofocus digital SLR camera; it fails because our expectations of what this constitutes a modern DSLR, lead to a design that is inherently complicated.

I fully agree with almost everything you say. Except, that "no video" is an absolutely necessary step in getting to a "pure photography camera ... without clutter and disctractions."
Unfortunately, Nikon did not go the rest of the way.

Nikon wanted too much
1. compatibility not only for older AI lenses (like any other "better" Nikon DSLR) but also for those really old dog Non-AI lenses ... instead of leaving these uncoated, unsuited for digital photography clunkers alone! They are strictly for use with film cameras or as deco objects or as collector's items. Or all three. But nothing else.
2. "Retro-UI" befitting a manual focus, aperture auto only classic SLR (FM/FE) and on top of that a modern UI to control a "very bland and uninspired" DSLR. Now there are 7 (!) wheels on that camera, plus numerous buttons and switches. Not well thought out at all. In the end, that's what makes the Df complicated rather than easy and really "silly" - as dpreview puts it.

Nikon gave it too little
* instead of buidling it on the D610 chassis, they should have started with D800 chassis, electronics, battery and most importantly AF-system. Then put the D4 sensor in it, if they really got a huge surplus of those left over. And then retro-style the package in a much more elegant, restrained, pure and straightforward way.
* retro- design should not have precluded inclusion of WiFi (and possibly NFC - for wireless remote control and GPS) plus master-trigger pop-up flash hidden in that huge viewfinder bump

Then Nikon could have easily sold it at 3k (body only, forget about that 50/1.8). It would have given them a meaningful and potentially attractive addition to their DSLR line-up:
* fast/reportage D4 on top (max fps), not cannibalized by D800 or Df
* Df for medium res/low light stuff, medium speed, WEDDING etc. and "retro-fans"
* D800/E for hi res stuff - landscape/studio stuff
* D610 for budget restrained hobbyists willing to put up with a marketing cripple

But ... they botched it.

To be honest, this camera will probably sell well, which is a shame because it will encourage Canon to follow this stupid retro fad. Don't get me wrong, if retro means focusing back on individual user needs and building cameras that are a better fit to them, then I have no problem. In the case of the DF, retro goes as far as looks (which it doesn't quite pull off) and adding another layer of complexity to the control set-up. It will sell well because it looks fashionable, reminds the grey-haired crowd (who have higher disposable incomes) of the cameras of their youth, yet doesn't lose any of the features that give you bragging rights down at the local camera club.

Yet this camera is not a sign of things to come, it is an awkward hark back to a previous era. It feels disjointed in its concept because cameras have moved on in the last three decades. The latest Nikon 'G' series lenses lack aperture rings, which means that the DF needs a way of setting aperture on the body. A multi-point AF system, multi-mode metering, variable frame rates, as well as all the 'digital stuff', add their own levels of complication. This leads to a messy design, which when combined with the desire for retro styling, gives birth to a bizarre Chimera.

 

[AvTvM]

To be honest, this camera will probably sell well, which is a shame because it will encourage Canon to follow this stupid retro fad. Don't get me wrong, if retro means focusing back on individual user needs and building cameras that are a better fit to them, then I have no problem. In the case of the DF, retro goes as far as looks (which it doesn't quite pull off) and adding another layer of complexity to the control set-up. It will sell well because it looks fashionable, reminds the grey-haired crowd (who have higher disposable incomes) of the cameras of their youth, yet doesn't lose any of the features that give you bragging rights down at the local camera club.

Yet this camera is not a sign of things to come, it is an awkward hark back to a previous era. It feels disjointed in its concept because cameras have moved on in the last three decades. The latest Nikon 'G' series lenses lack aperture rings, which means that the DF needs a way of setting aperture on the body. A multi-point AF system, multi-mode metering, variable frame rates, as well as all the 'digital stuff', add their own levels of complication. This leads to a messy design, which when combined with the desire for retro styling, gives birth to a bizarre Chimera.

+1
Except I believe the Df will not sell well. Way too expensive compared to much better cameras (5D III, D800). And those old greyhaired photogs are not stupid. It's more the younger crowd that falls for "retro" looks. Pseudo hipster kinda thing.

 

[Albi86]

To be honest, this camera will probably sell well, which is a shame because it will encourage Canon to follow this stupid retro fad. Don't get me wrong, if retro means focusing back on individual user needs and building cameras that are a better fit to them, then I have no problem. In the case of the DF, retro goes as far as looks (which it doesn't quite pull off) and adding another layer of complexity to the control set-up. It will sell well because it looks fashionable, reminds the grey-haired crowd (who have higher disposable incomes) of the cameras of their youth, yet doesn't lose any of the features that give you bragging rights down at the local camera club.

Yet this camera is not a sign of things to come, it is an awkward hark back to a previous era. It feels disjointed in its concept because cameras have moved on in the last three decades. The latest Nikon 'G' series lenses lack aperture rings, which means that the DF needs a way of setting aperture on the body. A multi-point AF system, multi-mode metering, variable frame rates, as well as all the 'digital stuff', add their own levels of complication. This leads to a messy design, which when combined with the desire for retro styling, gives birth to a bizarre Chimera.

+1
Except I believe the Df will not sell well. Way too expensive compared to much better cameras (5D III, D800). And those old greyhaired photogs are not stupid. It's more the younger crowd that falls for "retro" looks. Pseudo hipster kinda thing.

Likely.

Nikonians, as far as I see, are not really so impressed. The thing that might save this camera is if it (somehow, it's not clear yet) performs better with manual focus lenses. That could be an interesting perk, especially if you have a lot of Zeiss, Voigtländer and old Nikon lenses.

Anyway, I wouldn't be surprised to see it 2500 in 6 months, and closer to 2000 in 1 year. Hell, a great camera like the D7100 is now 900€ from its 1100€ of launch price.

 

[Loswr]

The thing that might save this camera is if it (somehow, it's not clear yet) performs better with manual focus lenses. That could be an interesting perk, especially if you have a lot of Zeiss, Voigtländer and old Nikon lenses.

I'm reading that the focus screen is not interchangeable...meaning no way to install a high precision or split prism screen. If true, so much for performing better with MF lenses...

 

[AvTvM]

Nikonians, as far as I see, are not really so impressed. The thing that might save this camera is if it (somehow, it's not clear yet) performs better with manual focus lenses. That could be an interesting perk, especially if you have a lot of Zeiss, Voigtländer and old Nikon lenses.

The Df offers mechanical compatibility with manual focus Nikon AI lenses [like all "better" Nikon DSLRs do] and - uniquely - also with even older Non-AI Nikkor lenses. However, even if one would really want to use 1960s lenses without proper coating and often sub-par IQ on digital sensors, handling itself on a Df will still be compromised. see the dpreview preview, page 3 .. they explain it quite well: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-df/3

Even worse, other than mechanical compatibility with old Nikon glass, the DF offers NOTHING at all to support manual focusing: no focusing aids at all, no special/"retro" viewfinder/screen with splitscreen or microlenses. Not even as an option. Viewfinder screen is fixed according to Nikon.

Canon EOS 6D with changeable viewfinder screen and some nice Zeiss MF lenses is definitely a far better "manual focusing" package.

 

[Albi86]

None of us has looked through the viewfinder yet

And if only they have managed to make the green dot more accurate at wide apertures, that alone would help a lot. But of course I'm just guessing. I'm curious about the special edition 50 mm kit lens that, if I understand correctly, should come with a better manual focus usability - whatever it means.

 

[nicku]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but nobody has talked about resolution. More living proof, that the Nikon D800 is so successful it makes plenty of the Canon users frustrated...

By the way, this DF looks incredibly lovely. The only drawback is the price tag...

The D800 is so successful that the 5DIII is outselling it by a wide margin, and resolution is so important that Nikon builds on the 'success' of their 36 MP camera by bringing out a retrocam with a paltry 16 MP. None of that frustrates me in the least... :

I'm really astonished that you overlooked the point...

Which point? That the design is blocky and overly complicated, or that it's overpriced?

In fact, I disagree that it's overpriced. This camera isn't about form or function, it's about appearance and perception. If it's priced too low, it won't be perceived as the status symbol Nikon clearly intends it to be. Of course, car makers seem to grasp that middle-aged men want faster and sleeker phallic symbols, whereas Nikon apparently thinks boxy and old-fashioned is a selling point.

Here we go again..... another slap in the face from Nikon
I wonder when Canon will wake up???...... if they do.

LOL. Canon will 'wake up' when Nikon starts taking away their market share. Can you honestly say you think this camera is going to help them do that? : : :

This particular camera maybe not... but the Df + D800 + D610 + THE PRICES definitely yes.

 

[Dylan777]

The more I look at this camera the more it looks cluttered. It should only have dials for aperture, shutter speed and ISO to keep it clean looking. Let the rest be buried in to nikons horrid menu system because after all this is a "purest" camera. :

Should look something like this; http://www.dylanphotography.phanfare.com/6246818#imageID=198269217

Oh well...rumor Fuji x200 is right around the corner and I'M IN

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

It's not bad, BUT they removed all video instead of improving it! And for this late in the game 1/2fps slower than the 5D3 despite delivering 7 less MP seems curious, maybe 7-8fps FF mirror box cost too much.... except the body seems to cost enough to support it though.

It does have a sensor that is better than the 5D3 at both ISO6400 and ISO100 though (although it's certainly not as much better at ISO100 as the D800 is at the DR bump is only about half as much, still doesn't hurt though, and the res is actually lower).

 

[Loswr]

LOL. Canon will 'wake up' when Nikon starts taking away their market share. Can you honestly say you think this camera is going to help them do that? : : :

This particular camera maybe not... but the Df + D800 + D610 + THE PRICES definitely yes.
[/quote]

Definitely? Guess you've invested heavily in Nikon stock, since it's a sure winner, 'eh?

I suppose it's escaped your notice that the 5DIII is outselling the D800, the 6D is outselling the D610 (and the former is cheaper), and that while the Df has no competition, that's probably for good reason. Oh, and the sales of all the aforementioned cameras are a drop in the bucket compared to the entry-level dSLR segment, where Canon continues to outsell Nikon.

But you go right on...confidence trumps facts any day, right?

 

[Roo]

I don't mind retro looks. In fact I'm looking at picking up an old Praktica or similar just for a display piece. However I wouldn't buy one of these because it is way too crowded with buttons and dials and looks like it will be a nightmare to learn and use. Even though I don't do video, I'm happy I spent my money on the 5d3 instead of something like this.

 

[J.R.]

LOL. Canon will 'wake up' when Nikon starts taking away their market share. Can you honestly say you think this camera is going to help them do that? : : :


This particular camera maybe not... but the Df + D800 + D610 + THE PRICES definitely yes.

Definitely? Guess you've invested heavily in Nikon stock, since it's a sure winner, 'eh?

I suppose it's escaped your notice that the 5DIII is outselling the D800, the 6D is outselling the D610 (and the former is cheaper), and that while the Df has no competition, that's probably for good reason. Oh, and the sales of all the aforementioned cameras are a drop in the bucket compared to the entry-level dSLR segment, where Canon continues to outsell Nikon.

But you go right on...confidence trumps facts any day, right?

There is a poll on DPReview as to who is going to buy a Nikon Df. Not surprisingly (maybe surprising to some) almost 50% of the votes are for the option - "No. Never minded. I'd preffer D800's, D610's, D700's or even a D400's if appears...". Only 5% will put in a pre-order.

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3571345

 

[DaveMiko]

The choice between Canon gear and Nikon, Sony, etc. gear is no choice at all. ... Besides, this is a Canon forum, not a Nikon one.