Coliban: I think, there should not be too much attention on outward appearances and things should not be judged on at very first sight. Of course, the DF is a retro camera, but over that someone should not forget that this camera has the sensor of a D4, the sensor from a 5500$ camera for half the price. The ISO, compensation and speed dials will help taking images not in a hurry, but with much more attention and a slow conscious for the composition of an image. I rather complain that Nikon was not radical enough, or too cowardly(?) to accomplish retro design and handling: Why didn't they put a cross-section or a fresnel focus in the DF or an interchangeable focusing screen? Why such a AF sensor field and why only 39 AF points in a very centered place for a full frame camera? This is not consequent enough. Nevertheless, i thing, Nikon has made altogether a nice and very good camera and if i read all the condemning comments here,it seems that the DF will be a sellout. The D4 sensor is incredible
again this silly sensor story. It is not the sensor that makes the D4 price, it is Nikon, and if Nikon sells a 2750$ camera for 5500$ that is stupid pricing policy only. Download the Df samples in full size on Nikon's page, and then see the IQ, and after that you will be less enthousiastic when talking about the sensor. That sensor is 2 years old and seems to take dust in Nikon's storage rooms, and the D4 pricing tells us why.
Good trial to get rid of an old sensor and taking advantage of the D4 pricing to justify a good looking camera with a rotten inside life, 1/4000th, crappy AF, no video, no tilt screen, no wi-fi, and so on. If you despeckle a camera and reduce it's functionality, put the cheapest components beside a correct sensor, then also reduce your price to that level. If I understand your statement, the sensor alone is worth 2000$. This is a sour cherry wrapped in sweet cream.
Gwalion: Classic design that will appeal to many, particularly older Nikon users such as myself. The little retro touches such as the threaded cable release are excellent. This is a winner.
winner of what?
yabokkie: I would think Nikon as a superstar started up 6 years ago with D3, D300, and several great lenses, whatever their tradition before that are mostly rubbish now.
there are still something in the rubbish league that are still shining today, from 1997 70-180 Zoom Micro to 2005 300/2.8 for example, but they don't change the whole picture.
this time you are right, yabokkie, that was exactly the time when I quit Nikon, there pricing policiy making them ascent to the heaven of snobism did make me take that decision.
Lea5: Fantastic camera! Well done Nikon I love this new camera. Besides my D800E and D4 this will be my third camera. I know which one will be used at most.It looks so good and beautiful. I can't wait to hold it in my hands. It was good to keep my old Nikkors.
Lets wait for your comments once the storm is over.
TFergus: All this 'purist' talk about it "finally looking like a camera" or "just what I've been wanting, a film-style camera"...
It's a cute look for a novelty "retro" camera, but if they really wanted to appeal to the 'purist' film shooters they should have removed the rear LCD and made us wait until we got home, and processed, to see what was actually captured. ;)
the 24 mpix sensor and 36 mpix, at choice, MF split/fresnel matte screen to use all the lenses it can take, the amazingly good 11 point AF system found in F6 body, and then a pricerange of 1450$ for the body in 24 and 1900$ in 36, and we are gone for glory.
fastprime: I don't get why the frame rate is only 5.5 when they are using the D4 16mp sensor and the same Expeed 3 processor.
simple a lowend camera targetting a low end market with a high end price. In life, it not important what you do, but how you do things, and here, we are not in a field of knowhow when it concerns the skills and features.
In exception of a good looking body and an overdriven price, there is nothing interesting to talk about, all it contains, and not contains, is negative loaded aspects only. If I had to rate the negative against the positive, we are within 90% for the negative aspects of this camera. What it has is questionable, except the sensor, and even that can be discussed, and all it has not, are many things that had made it somewhat more positive.
Frank_BR: The most important question for Nikon is: WHO WILL BUY THE Df?
1) a Dx owner?No way, the Df + Fx lenses are too expensive
2) a D600 owner?No, the D600 is a better camera
3) a D800 owner?No, a D800 owner is a pixel peeper, he is not interested in a 16 MP camera
4) a D4 owner?Maybe … a few senior professionals will buy the Df to use as a backup, or when shooting fast action is not needed
5) a celebrity?No, he/she prefers a P&S Hasselblad
6) a Canon, Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, etc. owner?HAHAHAHA! Are you kidding?
all of you, listen to Marike6, he has experience and uses this camera since a few years now. All others are ignorants anyway, and just discover it now. Good try, smartbutt.
victorragusila: Lots of people seem very disappointing with this camera...I am trying to understand why. It has a great sensor, it offers the manual controls it promised, the looks and the ergonomics it promised (old school). Anyone that complains about AF, isnt the point of this camera to use MF?
It is expensive because physical stuff is expensive. Software and features can be added for "free" because all the cost it has to be recuperated is the development cost. With physical stuff (dials, buttons, nice construction), the cost is for the stuff itself. Also, Nikon sees it as a small volume camera, so it will cost a more.
Besides all the ridiculous pretensions about "pure photography" it seems they provide pretty much what they promised...
old style body, with old dusty sensor, with all Nikon lens ability, and no feature included to use them in MF mode. An all that for Halloween, scary, isn't it.
Sergey Borachev: Great camera for those who like things nostalgic in this day and age.
For me, I will never get a camera like this ever again. It still has a flapping mirror and an OVF, and it uses big lenses. It is good as a collectible item though, as DSLRs continue to "fade away".
call it then, "the last of the many".
Adrian Van: Please put the 16MP sensor into a D800 pro body and charge the same $3000 for body, call it a D750 and you would likely sell a lot more of these bodies than the smaller market for a DF. No retooling to do, just change the sensor assembly and decal on body. Of course, that cannot happen as it would offset D4 sales, and give a lot of us event shooters what we want at the right price.
DF: although a small body with FF sensor is a great concept but price will leave it for those willing to pay it. Six months to a year the price will likely go down $300. Sony A7/ A7R prices seem more reasonable, just their new lenses are expensive.
I would buy a D800, or D610 (or better yet a D750) over the DF, for the rest of bodies higher specifications than DF. If I am spending that much money for a camera, the weight is less important than having all the functionality of the top Nikon DSLRs. Of course I do not fit the market for the DF.
why then not sell the D4 right away at the price it is worth, 2950$ for example. Nikon made this camer to get rid of the sensors that take dust in their stores. If you want to sell much, sell it at a reasonable price. nikon lost it's feet from the ground when the D3 became reality and D3X followed to complete it's delirium. At the price they sell them, you could at least await a rose wood grip and a LV case to carry it.
OldZorki: Not enough dials to justify the price. :)
Kidding aside, a great looking camera. People will have an ability to get D4 image quality at half the price, while using any Nikon lenses from any era. What not to like? For people without collection of Nikon FF lens it is probably a hard (but not impossible) sale.
Nikon never made a camera that was difficult, or uncomfortable to hold, in ergonomics they are champs.
vkphoto: I find it sadly ironic that Df can properly meter with every Nikkor lens (including non Ai) but doesn’t provide split screen for MF nor displays the aperture ring values in the viewfinder. The only explanation I have is that Nikon is protecting their Nikkor AF/G line of lenses. Unfortunately but Df is just another AF/G centric Nikon DSLR. The most important "retro" feature, MF support, is completely missing.
one more who found that out, maybe Nikon will some day find that out too.
Split screen is a stigmometric fresnel matte. It has 2 split polished fagments turned in opposed ramps 45 down towards the center. It splits evey straight vertical line into 2 separate lines unless it is sharp, then the 2 lines become one single one.
The Fresnel pattern surrounding it is a checkerd arrangement of crystaline inverted pyramids. If picture is unsharp, they turn dark, if picture is sharp, they get transparent and you see the subject. Fresnel works circular, while stigmo split system works vertical only.
Seek Katzeye site and see the different screen for all kind of cameras, and you see what's about. If focusing screen is interchangable, they will make one for this camera as well. Only problem is it's price, Katzeye mattes are high priced. I use one in my Fuji S5.
Hugo808: Well, it sure has got people talking!
I can't wait to see some pics, many of us seem to have forgotten that's the main thing with cameras. Let's see what the D4 sensor can do!
marike6, it seems to me that you have not downloaded the Nikon samples and looked at them closer. Before you speak about it's IQ, do that first, you will be less impressed and loud after you do that.
Take the picture from that scottish bagpiper, look at his face and check the details, after that, download the shots that Steve Huff has posted on his site, shot with A7 and 55/1.8 lens from Sony and from Zeiss, in Nashvile, jpeg right out of the box, and compare what you see. After that, close the Nikon file and put it in the recycle bin. And, you save 1050$ at same time.
Lardinio: I was reading this in an article defending the camera "This isn’t a camera to grow your business. This isn’t your second or third wedding body. This isn’t your do-it-all camera. This is the “grow yourself” camera. This is a gift to yourself for a job well done. This is a camera to remind you why you are a photographer"
Say, I'd love a camera for the sake of it, a nice little toy to play with, but I don't have $3k to grow myself. Neither has 99% of people who buy Nikon.
If I want to grow myself I'll stand in a bag of fertiliser, much cheaper.
"Nikon has plenty of other cameras in their stable for photographers to chose from. "
Only Nikon? are you sure?
LukeLT63: I think the choice not to mount sensors with more megapixels as in D600 and D800 is due to the fact that this machine was also created to mount optics very old , that the higher density sensors will really make and effort to be unsuitable. In this I think it is good choice to mount the sensor of the D4.....although I would like to know how many still use optical pre Ai. Certainly not a machine for sport , hunting or photographic studio . I see it impractical even for a journalist or those who report to the types of commands is unsuitable for those who do not have much time to lose. A camera body only suitable for reportage and travel. The price is definitely negative. Spend $ 2,747 for a camera that is not suitable for sports, cf, study it seems a bit ' too limiting especially when you consider the price and performance of the D600/610 ( 1997/1730 dollars).
1/4000th slowest speed in sport, with a light eating sensor as that one? Only the 1/4000th makes it ridiculous, the AF 39 points crapy system gives it the rest. With 1/8000th, D800 AF system, and between D800 and D610 pricing, it could have made my day.
NCB: Ken Rockwell said "The Nikon Df is small, light, tough and intuitive" . That sums it up nicely. It won't appeal to people who think their plastic CSCs are the bees knees, or that their iPhone is the only way to take pics now. It will appeal to real photographers who go out to get real top quality pics.
down the samples at Nikon in full size, look at them, and then go and buy a plastic one at 1/4 of the price and make excellent shots. What comes out there, and what Nikon publishes, is far away form winning the battle and catching the palm of glory.
Pat Cullinan Jr: PC: No flash?! That's TOO retro.
>> But where would they put the flash?
PC: You're asking me?
>> How about it pops up out of the hand-grip on a stalk?
PC: Pop it in good health.
>> How about a clip-on the size of a walnut?
PC: Knock yourself out.
hahaha, hang it over a nut tree, like Judas, head down and best over the same 2 uselss nuts, betrayed by the battery, after the job is done.
Who the heck needs a flash inside? stop preaching religious beliefs.
_P: I don't know... Mixed emotions... Simply stunning sensor with just about perfect pixel count. This is huge advantage maybe even justifying initial price point. But at the same time it also is just a tool and as such it ether can be a transparent and non-disturbing executor of my photographic ideas (wasn't it advertised as such?) or a pain in the neck... How exactly am I suppose to change exposure compensation keeping Nikon Df with 70-200/2.8 hand held while still looking through the viewfinder? Should I higher an assistant to address that strange need?
Get the samples down from Nikon site, and see then how stunning the sensor is. What makes D4 stunning is the 6 Grant price tag, not the sensor. There is nothing so fantastic about the sensor. I have full sized shots of all Nikon sensors, same picture, same subject, day and night shot to compare, and here, believe me, the D4 sensor is far from being the best. I have downed the samples in full size, and believe me again, any 4/3 like GX7 or OM1 makes same, if not even better, picture.
oselimg: This so called"retro" trend must be a very effective way of milking the vain and the shallow. Why not make even older looking cameras and put even more absurd prices on them.
Mmmhhh, i will call Lagerfeld to see what he says about it, probably "too fat". :-)
Deardorff: Over TWO THOUSAND SEVEN HUNDRED DOLLARS???
Nikon is greedy.
Buy it now, once US econmoy crashes, it will soon cost 1 billion of $. Oh, by the way, it is not a question of IF, but a question of WHEN.