Am I the only one excited for the Nikon DF camera?

insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
edited December 2, 2013 in Cameras
I am pretty damn stoked about this camera. I am ready to put my D700 for sale for this camera. If the price is right and specs. :lust
«1

Comments

  • ZerodogZerodog Registered Users Posts: 1,480 Major grins
    edited November 3, 2013
    I am curious.
  • MitchellMitchell Registered Users Posts: 3,503 Major grins
    edited November 4, 2013
    Seems to me like they just took a D600 and put the ISO, aperture and SS controls on the top of the body like an old school Nikon film camera.

    If so, I'm not really interested. After these few years of digital bodies, I've gotten used to rapidly changing these setting with my thumb and index finger flywheels.
    Mitch
    http://clearwaterphotography.smugmug.com/
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited November 4, 2013
    Mitchell wrote: »
    Seems to me like they just took a D600 and put the ISO, aperture and SS controls on the top of the body like an old school Nikon film camera.

    If so, I'm not really interested. After these few years of digital bodies, I've gotten used to rapidly changing these setting with my thumb and index finger flywheels.


    I'd say it is closer to a D4 and a F3 FM camera smashed into one.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited November 4, 2013
    I was, but...
    Mitchell wrote: »
    Seems to me like they just took a D600 and put the ISO, aperture and SS controls on the top of the body like an old school Nikon film camera.

    There is no dedicated aperture control on the body or lens as far as I can tell. This is disappointing to me. The back of the camera is a carbon copy of the D610. Minus the video button of course. The front of the camera has 6 or 7 mystery buttons/wheels. So much for elegant simplicity, or K.I.S.S. design.

    I would call it a D610 plus a few knobs that should have been there anyway, minus video, and minus 8mp. Not so interested anymore.
    If so, I'm not really interested. After these few years of digital bodies, I've gotten used to rapidly changing these setting with my thumb and index finger flywheels.

    Agreed. If it had been a digital version of this: front, top, I would have been interested. Such a camera would force or encourage deliberate, manual shooting, while keeping it simple and compact.

    I'm even more impressed today with Fuji, for getting it right. Shutter speed on the body. Aperture ring on the lens. EC dial. ISO dial would have been nice, but I have my Fn button set to ISO, so no biggie.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • OsoOso Registered Users Posts: 164 Major grins
    edited November 4, 2013
    It's a nice looking camera but I'm not buying. For $2700 plus the lenses I would need, it's not going to get me to upgrade from DX to FX; as a hobbyist that's a boatload of money I'd rather spend on traveling somewhere interesting to photograph rather than on equipment.

    It's really just Nikon competing with their own line of cameras or just trying to find something that will sell. If the DF reduces demand further for the 610 or refurbished 600 and the price of those cameras drops, then maybe I get in the FX game.
    Steve
    Pics: http://stevehymon.smugmug.com
    Blog: http://stevehymonphotos.blogspot.com
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    I'm actually very excited about it, but I'm worried that Nikon's upper management isn't going to ALSO compete with the likes of the Sony A7 / A7R etc.... I guess we'll see what other cameras Nikon has up their sleeves in the near future!

    =Matt=
    “My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    Well, damn it. it is just a little more $$$ than I'd hoped for. I am still interested in it, there are so many non-AI lenses that just are collecting dust and are so damn cheap.
  • lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    1 Card slot
    One card slot - not good.
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    If I was considering the move up to FF I would be very interested. The D4 sensor in a D610 body at half the price of a D4 would be attractive. However I already own the D4 and the D800E so while it interests me I'll be taking a pass on it.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    Having slept on it, I don't know why anyone would buy this over the D610, other than to use old lenses.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • jonh68jonh68 Registered Users Posts: 2,711 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    I was excited when it was rumored to be mirror less and I was hoping I could use high speed sync with my alien bees like the strobists do with the fuji x100s. The specs as released are unimpressive based on what is already out there for the price. This would be a great camera if the D800 or D610 didn't exist.
    www.jonimages.com
  • lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    jonh68 wrote: »
    I was excited when it was rumored to be mirror less and I was hoping I could use high speed sync with my alien bees like the strobists do with the fuji x100s. The specs as released are unimpressive based on what is already out there for the price. This would be a great camera if the D800 or D610 didn't exist.

    I agree. I don't see the niche that it could fill.
    Phil
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    jonh68 wrote: »
    I was excited when it was rumored to be mirror less and I was hoping I could use high speed sync with my alien bees like the strobists do with the fuji x100s. The specs as released are unimpressive based on what is already out there for the price. This would be a great camera if the D800 or D610 didn't exist.

    Agreed. For the price, it should be one of two things:

    A) the true D700 successor. 51pt AF, 8fps, 10fps with grip.

    or,

    B) An elegant, compact, true retro FF DSLR with the emphasis on manual shooting and simplicity, sitting somewhere between the Fuji XPro-1 and Leica M.

    But it's neither.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Having slept on it, I don't know why anyone would buy this over the D610, other than to use old lenses.

    The D4 sensor would be a good reason.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms Registered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    For me it's a good camera for the future if I end up needing the high ISO capability but really the D4 sensor is the only part I'd be after. As a primary camera the AF coverage is a bit lacking. I know I'm not the target market but that's my main gripe, and one reason why I wrote off the D600.
    http://www.jonathanbeckley.com/
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    It is interesting how some people want more megapixels and some do not want more than XX megapixels. 16mp is perfect for me, smaller raw file sizes. Yeah hard drives are getting cheaper, but I hate to keep buying them.
    The biggest appeal to me is the non-AI lenses, some good ones are selling for so cheap; very few even want them. Nice mechanical dials, small'ish look, a mix of features I like.
    The 3 things that kill it for this camera, no high speed flash sync. (means I will still need my d700 for real work). The price is $2750; $400 more than I can even spend. :cry And no option for split focusing screen like the good ol f3 type K cameras.

    Now that I think of it... I do not think this camera was meant for real professional use. It is meant for travel, casual, adventure type use.
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    Harryb wrote: »
    The D4 sensor would be a good reason.

    Why?

    http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Why?

    http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Camera-Sensor-Ratings

    Because its the best low light camera I have used. I love the D800E but when the light is low and I'm shooting at ISOs above 1600 its the D4 that gets the call.
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    Dxomark disagrees.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • insanefredinsanefred Registered Users Posts: 604 Major grins
    edited November 5, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Dxomark disagrees.


    You got to be kidding. If I went with everything with what DXO mark says what's good and what's not. I would never be happy. Same with any other worthless lab testing site.
    They are just a reference at best.
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms Registered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Dxomark disagrees.

    Actually I don't think DXO does, you're taking 2 specific data points but those don't tell the whole story.

    IIRC they test for dynamic range at base ISO and then noise levels for the high ISO score. They don't test for the dynamic range at high ISO's so while the D800 downsampled can do very well noise wise it's a clear loser in terms of DR at those higher ISO's compared to the D4.
    http://www.jonathanbeckley.com/
  • HarrybHarryb Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 22,708 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Dxomark disagrees.

    Well all those thousands of pictures I took with the D4 sure fooled me. If I had only known. rolleyes1.gif
    Harry
    http://behret.smugmug.com/ NANPA member
    How many photographers does it take to change a light bulb? 50. One to change the bulb, and forty-nine to say, "I could have done that better!"
  • jmphotocraftjmphotocraft Registered Users Posts: 2,987 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    Actually I agree that dxomark is pretty worthless. One might get the idea that the Canon 5D3 is a bad camera, which it obviously is not.

    But my point was that the D4 sensor in this camera can't possibly be worth a $1000 premium over the D610. I appreciate the insight that the D4 has better DR at high ISO, but $1000 better? Come on.

    Regardless, I think Nikon is about to have a Sigma experience with the price tag.
    -Jack

    An "accurate" reproduction of a scene and a good photograph are often two different things.
  • zoomerzoomer Registered Users Posts: 3,688 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    If it had the autofocus system of the d4 I would have bought it yesterday. As it is, the single card slot and the 610 autofocus are no gos for me.

    Since the D700 and D3 the only Nikon FF that has tempted me has been the D3S.....still waiting....I may just buy a refurbished D3S if I can find one.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
    http://500px.com/Shockey
    alloutdoor.smugmug.com
    http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
  • lifeinfocuslifeinfocus Registered Users Posts: 1,461 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    zoomer wrote: »
    If it had the autofocus system of the d4 I would have bought it yesterday. As it is, the single card slot and the 610 autofocus are no gos for me.

    Since the D700 and D3 the only Nikon FF that has tempted me has been the D3S.....still waiting....I may just buy a refurbished D3S if I can find one.

    Just wondering, what specifically about the D4 autofocus do you like?

    Thanks,
    Phil
    http://www.PhilsImaging.com
    "You don't take a photograph, you make it." ~Ansel Adams
    Phil
  • MavMav Registered Users Posts: 174 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    lifeinfocus wrote: »
    Just wondering, what specifically about the D4 autofocus do you like?

    Thanks,
    Phil

    Looks like the D4 AF has much better coverage

    D4:
    img_04.png

    D610:
    img_17.png

    When you look through the viewfinder of the D600, it's quite an alarmingly small amount of coverage...
  • jonh68jonh68 Registered Users Posts: 2,711 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Actually I agree that dxomark is pretty worthless. One might get the idea that the Canon 5D3 is a bad camera, which it obviously is not.

    But my point was that the D4 sensor in this camera can't possibly be worth a $1000 premium over the D610. I appreciate the insight that the D4 has better DR at high ISO, but $1000 better? Come on.

    Regardless, I think Nikon is about to have a Sigma experience with the price tag.

    This is how I feel about the Df. It has less features than a camera that costs 1k less and less features than one that is in the same price range.
    www.jonimages.com
  • NikonsandVstromsNikonsandVstroms Registered Users Posts: 990 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    jmphotocraft wrote: »
    Actually I agree that dxomark is pretty worthless. One might get the idea that the Canon 5D3 is a bad camera, which it obviously is not.

    But my point was that the D4 sensor in this camera can't possibly be worth a $1000 premium over the D610. I appreciate the insight that the D4 has better DR at high ISO, but $1000 better? Come on.

    Regardless, I think Nikon is about to have a Sigma experience with the price tag.

    Yes it can, perhaps not to you but to people who work above ISO 6400 it could and likely was worth the 3,500 dollar premium to get the D4. Now if they don't need the AF/FPS/ergonomics/video of the D4 they can get that sensor in a body for about half the price, if they included the D4's AF it would have been an ideal camera for some of my work, now it's one with a minor caveat. I'm looking at this body very seriously for the future deal.gif
    http://www.jonathanbeckley.com/
  • zoomerzoomer Registered Users Posts: 3,688 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    lifeinfocus wrote: »
    Just wondering, what specifically about the D4 autofocus do you like?

    Thanks,
    Phil

    D4 has the best low light autofocus and also for fast action. Much better than the 610 autofocus they put in the DF.

    They give it the best low light sensor....but handicap it by not giving it the best low light autofocus...so how much do you really gain...frustrating.
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/21695902@N06/
    http://500px.com/Shockey
    alloutdoor.smugmug.com
    http://aoboudoirboise.smugmug.com/
  • jonh68jonh68 Registered Users Posts: 2,711 Major grins
    edited November 6, 2013
    NikonsandVstroms wrote: »
    Yes it can, perhaps not to you but to people who work above ISO 6400 it could and likely was worth the 3,500 dollar premium to get the D4. Now if they don't need the AF/FPS/ergonomics/video of the D4 they can get that sensor in a body for about half the price, if they included the D4's AF it would have been an ideal camera for some of my work, now it's one with a minor caveat. I'm looking at this body very seriously for the future deal.gif

    For my dollar if ISO is an issue, the price point of the Df gets it into used D3s or D3x territory. For me the performance of those cameras is worth the additional money.

    Above 6400 there isn't a huge amount of difference between the D610 and D4.
    www.jonimages.com
Sign In or Register to comment.