Devendra: After reading majority of the disappointed reaction, it is easy to conclude that Internet is full of armchair ceo's
Internet is not, Nikon is. Nikon forces us to take what they give us, instead of asking what we want and give us that. For most of us it was a clear message. Go mirrorless, FF, light and versatile. If sticking to dslr principles and compatible with all F mount lenses, do a retro body, what they did and looks good, but where is the functionality? 1/4000th, crappy AF, no video, no tilt screen, no wi-fi, no MF facilities, a 2 year old low pixel count sensor, simply 50% less for double price.
Huge developement, isn't it. This camera is a donkey in a 2750$ suit. The future will show who of us is right in this matter, you and Nikon, or us. If I say us, I mean all those that do not agree with that kinda policiy from Nikon, what is just a play around with our balls. So, again a message to Nikon, "good luck with that".
rsf3127: Between this and an A7, I would take the latter anyday. The only exception would be if I had a large inventory of Nikon glass.
just a blind photographer, it's time you get a few newer catalogs. It is strange that just anyone, among Nikon users too, welcomed the new F4 full range zooms because of weight and due to better light sensitivity of the senors, where 2.8 heavy gear is not needed anymore, or not that often. You all run heavy 2.8, 1.8, and even faster lenes to get a shallower DOF, and if you want a sharper shot all over you stop down to 5.6. So, what is wrong then with F4 lenses for urban and all day work.
Now, concerning A7, you can take all kind of glass from 0.95 up to what you want and in any brand with adpaters. Sony's new lenses are in 2.8, 1.8, for the FE ount, Zeiss Otus is 1.8, 55mm in 1.8, and the roadmap will give us more, not to forget that future development in hybrid lenses for that mount will follow, Samyang, Sigma, Tamron. Once the market takes size, and Sony Aeof Fe mount market shares will grow. it is not even on the market yet, it starts in one month from now only.
mpgxsvcd: Hasselbad thinks this is a great camera and that isn't a good thing.
dont forget the LV bag to hide it inside and prevent the rain to touch the rosewood grip.
pgphoto_ca: Image quality first....with the D4 sensor, you can not go wrong!
That's Nikon :)
try first, talk later. Down the samples in full size at the DF page of Nikon, look at them very close, after that, bury the file. Amen.
Rob: The willful exclusion of video is just ridiculous in this day and age, and feels unnecessarily anachronistic. How about letting the user decide if he wants to use the video feature, instead of not having it when needing it?
I do not want video, i never use it. That does not means that it should not be in there. But, since you pay for all you get, I prefer a camera with 200$ lower price and no video. Here, you have, no video, no tilting screen, no wi-fi, no good AF system, a dusty old sensor, no 1/8000 th speed, no dual card slots, but you pay 1300$ more than what it should cost, that is what I call a paradox.
nonuniform: I wish them well, but when I said I wanted an A7 with an F mount, this isn't what I had in mind. Oh well. We'll never see another camera like the D700 from Nikon I guess.
if you want an A7 with an F mount buy one and put an adapter on it. Why would you like to become stuck with an F mount only.
Ferling: While it's a cool toy, and with limited market. It's obvious the price may reflect that and all the retooling. This is an apple's vs. oranges issue with those complaining that it lacks video and top end components. It's a designed for a very specific market of shooters.
I would be curious to see how Canon responds to this, maybe a refitted F1? Or, more importantly, if they decide to go after Sony with something more serious. I have the 5D mkIII in my sights when my current bodies expire, but I'm holding out to see what Canon does next. Fingers crossed.
Canon loses enough money and customers with their own stupidity, they do not need to copy Nikon's stupidity to dig their grave. If both continue the way they do now, soon all Nikon and Canon users will get a 1% er tatoo.
Vadimka: Wow, once again Nikon releasing a bandaid camera to stop the bleeding, and yet again its not going to work. Looks like they forgot one little component, which is innovation.
Nikon is playing safe and trying to make an omelet without breaking any eggs and I don't think its going to work. (Nikon-1 was a great example of that)
They have to understand they are not loosing market share to Retro design, they loosing market share to Innovation and size/weight reduction.
They will sell some, and it might even become a little cult camera for a few people, but it will not stop the a matures and photo enthusiast moving from Nikon to Mirrorless (retro and modern) systems. It reminds me of Panasonic L1 / Leica D3 back in 4/3 era, nice cameras but nothing ground breaking or highly popular.
Find Jesus, he makes the blind see!
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.