The worst thing about the DF is the Disappointment

Started Nov 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
David314
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,671
Like?
Re: Without using it, who knows how close or not close Nikon came
In reply to marike6, Nov 11, 2013

marike6 wrote:

David314 wrote:

A design intended to combine elements that appeal modern AF Nikon shooters longing for the superb low-light performance of the D4 sensor at a fraction of the D4 cost. And one also intended to appeal to users who prefer a slower, more methodical, traditional approach to photography and that also offers full compatability with pretty much all F-mount lenses ever made.

you can shoot slow and methodically with any of the nikon dslrs

astonishing enough, pre ai lenses mount quite nicely to the d5300 all the way bsck to the d40. In fact the d40 would mount practically any f mount lens

You can mount any f lens on a D5300, no pre-AI Nikkor will meter with it at all.

You can if you want look at all the limitations of using non-CPU lenses on the D600 for example.

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d600/compatibility02.htm

looks the same as the Df with the exception of metering non AI lenses - which is simply a software feature where you manually set the aperture - something Nikon should have done a long time ago anyway

simply no better than a d800

You are making an assumption.

so are you

First of all I don't have much problem accurately focussing my AI lenses on my D800, but if Rorslett reports that the viewfinder is improved for MF (I've been reading him for years and think he's quite knowledgeable) I'm going to have to take his word for it.

well, the green dot has not changed and the point is not that you cant MF with D800, or any Nikon camera for that matter, it is that the Df doesn't add any improved focusing aid over the D800, D600, D40 etc.

I'm not sure why users here who haven't seen or shot with the Df are writing it off as a poor implementation, but I suspect if the price had been an impossibly low $2000, those users would have been far less in number.

i suspect outside of a vocal minority on this website, there will be few that want to spend $2750 for a camera, let alone $3000 for the d800 and then the Df, and for gosh sake, have you seen the price in Europe?

no at $1750 this would have sold more as it would have at $3500 if they would added more features

of course we can disagree

$1750 if you want Nikon to actually lose money on the Df. I don't. A Nikon that is not doing well financially is not good for anyone.

nor is building a camera and putting it at high price and not selling any - at least with a popular low price camera you sell more lenses, flashes, and bring more people over to Nikon

as built it is a camera that doesn't really officer any compelling features beyond the d800 and d600, and the price is a bit much just to get what is essentially a d600 with the d4 sensor

Compelling features?

  • It offers the D4 sensor with its large 7.3μm pixel pitch
  • smaller, more manageable files more appropriate for high volume shooters much like the D700.

why not buy a d3 or d3s, those would be even better!

I'd love a D3s, but last time I checked it was discontinued and used ones are much more expensive than $2700.

and a Df is $2750 in the US, only and you can find D800's for $2800 - another $750-$1000 and you can get a D3s

and the Df is $750 more than the D600

it is not that the Df is not a fine camera, but it has to compete with a lot of other fine cameras with features and price

  • Better build quality and less generic, more unique design

better than what? It appears to be much like a d600

No. The D600 only has magnesium alloy top plate and rear. The only part on the Df that aren't magnesium alloy are the front plate near the DOF preview.

I think you might be overstating the difference, there appears to be very little if any magnesium on the front

- if your definition of build quality is amount of metal, I don't see much difference between the d600 and Df although the D800 at roughly the same price or much less if you are in Europe, seems to have more metal

I rather like the D600 it looks and feels solid. It does not appear as solid and well made as the Df, but I haven't held the Df. Of course the Df is Made in Japan, and AFAIK, the D600 is not.

yet the same priced more metal d800 is made in japan

I'm not arguing that in the UK and in Europe the Df isn't priced high. But so are all the other Nikon cameras relative to US prices.

but the Df is about the same price as the D800 in the US and much more than the D800 in Euroope

All Nikons and Canons have different pricing scheme per region. In the US, to price the Df between the D610 and D800 make perfect sense to me. YMMV.

since the Df is essentially the same price as the D800, it doesn't make much sense to me

so yes, a great sensor in a different looking camera, with an appeal to the past

I think ultimately, the styling trumped usability, people forget the current two wheel design has evolved over many years and there are some very good reasons for its use - obviously Nikon agrees as they kept it on the Df

again, I think it very disappointing how close this camera came to being a real out of the park home run with the some improvements in manual focus and ergonomics

and even the reviews that seem to be very enthusiastic of the camera seem to question the price point

now obviously, people like to buy cool things and will pay a premium to do such a thing, I am as guilty as anyone of that and I do hope that the Df is a financial success for Nikon as it will presage other innovative designs

and I know you will enjoy your Df

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
????New
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow