Nikon Df - Official

[Photo-John]

It's official now - the Nikon Df has been unveiled.

Nikon Df Announcement >>

Now that everything has been confirmed (or not), what do you all think? Is it what you'd hoped for? How about the price? It's not cheap. But is it reasonable for what you get? It's a hell of a lot less than a D4, that's for sure.

[Liz]

Wow! Looks like Nikon has a winner here! Since I have no experience with Nikon any evaluation would not mean much! However, just in case anyone might be interested in purchasing.....I got an email from B&H this morning.

B&H is accepting pre-orders now - with delivery estimate November 28th!

Liz

[armando_m]

A second D800 body will cost me the same as the DF !

If price comes down some I might consider it,
at this price level it makes no sense to me

[Franglais]

If I was a photo-reporter then it would interest me. Discreet, excellent low-light performance, works with lots of small prime lenses. Better than a D4 or a 5D Mk3 for someone in a dangerous warzone.

For someone looking for a generalist camera the D610 or the D800 is more cost-effective. Still doesn't interest me.

[Photo-John]

If I was a photo-reporter then it would interest me. Discreet, excellent low-light performance, works with lots of small prime lenses. Better than a D4 or a 5D Mk3 for someone in a dangerous warzone.

For someone looking for a generalist camera the D610 or the D800 is more cost-effective. Still doesn't interest me.

Very well-put, Charles. I am in agreement. One exception would be older photographers who have a bunch of old Nikkor lenses they want to be able to use. I am thinking the Df might really appeal to those photographers.

[wfooshee]

So much about this camera is about its feel rather than its tech. The teasers were all about "Ah, it's back!" The tech is there to let people know that yes, it's a real camera and can do what you need, but the feel is about controls that go back to the F series. Instead of multi-function buttons and a couple of do-everything thumb wheels, you have a shutter speed dial, a mode switch, exposure compensation, all on their own dials or switches. I have an F4 that I play with occasionally, and I can see the appeal of "real" controls on a modern camera. I even have a couple of pre-AI lenses. I would be surprised to not see a trickle-down eventually, to even the "pro-sumer" level camera along the lines of the current D7100/D610.

Nikon seems to have looked at this camera with the idea that there are some old codgers out there with their F3 and F4 cameras, their ancient but wonderful glass, just wishing they could explore the "new" digital world but they don't like the way the cameras work. Let's give 'em one that works like their old stuff. Is it retro, is it nostalgia, is it trying to reach those last 10 or 12 guys with the old equipment?

I really like the camera, but if I (not a working photographer) could justify a 2800-dollar camera, this probably wouldn't be the one. I like the philosophy, though, and I hope it moves down further into the line.

The criticism I see about this camera always seems to be "They used the wrong sensor!" I'm not sure a different one would have made business sense for them. If they built it around the D800 parts they probably would have had to price it even higher than it is to keep from stranding D800s in the warehouses, and building it around the D610 parts makes no sense, either. They just came out with the 610, why do they need another one? The D610f?

[Franglais]

...They just came out with the 610, why do they need another one? The D610f?

The D610 is made in Thailand and the DF is made in Japan.

Got to give the manufacturing teams something to do. Two years after a major model release for the Japan team (D4, D800) there is usually a variant release to keep people busy until the next major release.

The D610 is just a bugfix release to forget about the oily shutter problem.

[Axle]

Is it shiny? Yes.
Do I want one? Yes.

I feel this camera would be the perfect fit for me, and a worthy replacement for my D300 and my general style of shooting. However at the pricetag...sadly I will be giving this one a pass. Maybe when my D300 kicks the bucket I'll revisit it, but until then, I can't really see myself dropping 3K on it.

[Greg McCary]

After watching a video of it being used I am in the crowd of I don't get it. It's not much smaller than a D800 and the top plate is cluttered. I don't see why it would appeal to photojournalist is it's size and weight isn't any smaller than the D610. If you chop the top plate off the lower portion looks like any other DSLR Nikon makes.
There are a couple of steps you have to go through in order to use the older lenses. It's not a matter of just throwing one on.
I am sure it will be a huge seller for Nikon but I don't see anything revolutionary about it. I actually think a D800 or D600/610 would be easier to shoot with.

[Franglais]

OK seen it, tried it. It's pretty big. The knurled wheels feel a bit uncomfortable. I was baffled by the controls for a while - they are all there but I overlooked the mode change PSAM switch.

By comparison - the Sony RX10 I really liked but is certainly not a pocket camera.

And the Sony A7 which seemed really small (but then I have rather large hands).

[Old Timer]

Oh yes I am one of those old codgers that on seeing the Df went all blurry eyed. I first fell in love with Nikon in 1971 when I bought my F and have had a continued love affair ever since. Some 15 Nikon bodies later I still have the F still love the feel of it in my hands. Sure I made the switch to digital several years ago and I do admit I love it. However just seeing the Df was a nostalgic trip back to the beginning for me. Will I rush out and buy one, no probably not at the price it is now going for, but I would wager that some day that camera body will be in my camera cabinet along with my old prime lenses and the F body.

[Photo-John]

Thanks for sharing those photos, Charles! I don't want to get off-topic here, but I was also disappointed in the size of the Sony RX10. It's still an interesting camera and the size doesn't make it a bad camera. But I was hoping it would be smaller. I am now really interested in the new Olympus Stylus 1, which is a similar concept to the RX10, but with a smaller sensor and a much more compact body. Here's a link to my Olympus Stylus 1 announcement, for anyone who's interested:

Olympus Stylus 1 Intro >>

And the Sony Alpha A7? I absolutely love it. I didn't think I would, but I do. I thought putting a full-frame sensor in a mirrorless camera was a silly idea. But now that I've used it, I love it. It could very well be the first full-frame camera I pull the trigger on.

[Photo-John]

I agree about the emotional impact of the camera, Larry. It speaks to me, too. But what about the specs and performance? I think Nikon could have sold a whole lot more if they'd given it a fast burst rate. That would open up the market to all the sports photographers who've been waiting for a D700 replacement. Those guys are getting surly.

[starriderrick]

This maybe off topic... That is one sexy Nikon DSLR! ;0)

Love at first sight...so to speak.

[Photo-John]

This maybe off topic... That is one sexy Nikon DSLR! ;0)

Love at first sight...so to speak.

No - I think you're right back in the middle of it, Rick :-D

[Franglais]

I've read that part of Sony's strategy is to innovate and produce products that the others don't - the idea being that people who already the basics that they need will buy extra equipment.

I think that the DF is a Nikon example of this strategy. For most people it won't be their main body, but an alternative for the fun of it.

[volks]

I've read that part of Sony's strategy is to innovate and produce products that the others don't - the idea being that people who already the basics that they need will buy extra equipment.

I think that the DF is a Nikon example of this strategy. For most people it won't be their main body, but an alternative for the fun of it.

Sony's strategy will be to grow the mirror-less cameras along with a line of new lenses. Easy enough for Sony to do. Mirror-less cameras are smaller and in the long run will be cheaper to manufacture than dslr mirror cameras. For Nikon and Canon, this will be a lot more difficult as they have gizillions of lenses that will not work on mirror-less cameras.

I hope I don't get trouble for saying this, but PhotographyLife has a good article about mirror-less vs dslr's.

[Photo-John]

Sony's strategy will be to grow the mirror-less cameras along with a line of new lenses. Easy enough for Sony to do. Mirror-less cameras are smaller and in the long run will be cheaper to manufacture than dslr mirror cameras. For Nikon and Canon, this will be a lot more difficult as they have gizillions of lenses that will not work on mirror-less cameras.

I hope I don't get trouble for saying this, but PhotographyLife has a good article about mirror-less vs dslr's.

No trouble - except for not giving us a link ;-)

[Photo-John]

I've read that part of Sony's strategy is to innovate and produce products that the others don't - the idea being that people who already the basics that they need will buy extra equipment.

I think that the DF is a Nikon example of this strategy. For most people it won't be their main body, but an alternative for the fun of it.

I totally agree, Charles. This is Nikon looking for a niche. It just remains to be seen if it was a smart niche. Sony has been very successful with their gambles, so far. Nikon, not so much (the Nikon 1).

[volks]

Here is the link....

Photography Life

[OldClicker]

Sony's strategy will be to grow the mirror-less cameras along with a line of new lenses. Easy enough for Sony to do. Mirror-less cameras are smaller and in the long run will be cheaper to manufacture than dslr mirror cameras. For Nikon and Canon, this will be a lot more difficult as they have gizillions of lenses that will not work on mirror-less cameras.

I hope I don't get trouble for saying this, but PhotographyLife has a good article about mirror-less vs dslr's.

Why do the Nikon and Canon lenses require a mirror? Why do mirrorless cameras have to be smaller?

[volks]

Mirror-less cameras don't have to be smaller. They just can be smaller due to the lack of the mirror. The reasons for current Nikon and Canon sdlr lenses not working is described in the photography life link above... mirror-less vs sdlr article. Something to do with distance.

[OldClicker]

Mirror-less cameras don't have to be smaller. They just can be smaller due to the lack of the mirror. The reasons for current Nikon and Canon sdlr lenses not working is described in the photography life link above... mirror-less vs sdlr article. Something to do with distance.

As the article says, one option is to remove the mirror from the existing bodies and use the current lenses. Being mirrorless does not define the flange to sensor distance.

[volks]

You are right. Read the article again. Thanks for pointing that out.

[volks]

Folks, go back to the link and read the new announcement on the new Nikon BDF camera.
It's funny and good for a laugh.

Photography Life