peevee1: " full-frame DSLR with the sensor and processing guts of the company's flagship D4"
It has the sensor, but not the processor of D4. D4 is able to process 12 frames per second off that sensor, not just 5.5.Cheap sensor from 2y/o D4.Cheap internals from 1.5 y/o D600, with "economized" to non-existence video codec and ports, microphones and flash.Cheap battery from D3200 and Coolpix P7100.New retro body and cut-down firmware.
$999 camera which is so limited that they decided they would not be able to sell enough of them to break even with fixed costs at this price, so decided to overprice it for much more limited market.
@HowAboutRawthe Nikons D700 AF-Module was much better as the D7000 ones; That was the reason I gave up the D7000 very soon and purchased the D700; Much more reliable; For a new cam like the DF i Expect a new improved AF-Module and not an old baken one from the D7000/D600http://mynikonlife.com.au/gear/digital-slr-cameras/d700/K
the AF of the D700 wasn't inherited from the D3? and is still better then todays Multicam 4800 in Nikon DF? and with Battery Pack even the D700 reached 8Fr/s?The D700 was a much more better balanced package;hopefully there will be no oil-dust on the sensor like on the crappy D600/K
Donnie G: The Nikon Df would have been a great matchup against the original Canon 5D of 2005 in terms of price, features, and the respective companies different approaches to camera design.
even it's fom D4 - this sensor is not a technical wonder (anymore) - and I think not worth the price; it was only a slight improvement to the D3s sensor; Not that it's not great but - but touch the ground ;)A slightly improved D600 sensor would have done it!!!/K
noirdude: It's too thick.. Should be as slim as FM2.. and I agree with you that
"My worry about the Df is that Nikon might have gone too far backwards for the sake of cosmetic appeal, without really adding any practical benefit to the shooting experience"
And within that price range, I might as well get myself a D800/e and forget about its retro design which I think isn't close enough to what we have in the old days.
But Nikon, I appreciate the effort though.. :)
@marike6 owning a X100s too I agree fully :"retro window dressing" the DF is not a a product on its own but a mix of existing (some low quality like the 39-Sensor Module of the D7000/D600) components; it looks bulky even compared to my D700;/K
after the release of D800/D4/D600/DF is still see no worthy/fitting D700 successor - I miss the balance of features the D700 had;
down sampled D800 sensor 36M to 16MP is very near to that D4 performance; and to be honest Fullframe has lost Area in High ISO Performance compared for example the OMD-EM1 cam. it performs like an APS-C and show capabilities in todays sensor performance.
at all it's not worth that price./Ka proud Nikon D700 user not a Sony fanboy
hydrospanner: When you can't (or don't want to) answer a valid, direct question...go ahead and insult the person that asked it. Wonderful.
To stay in german scope; if you have the money you can afford a Porsche, if not then something on cheaper level;so with the Leica S, ..cheersKarl
Is there a Nikon-F Adapter for the pentax-mount? allowing AF and apterture control?interesting cam!/Karl
exact the right moment!great!!
q8wizard: WHAT IF CANON 5DIII GET 84% SCORE, ARE WE GOING TO CALL IT CANON DPREVIEW, WAIT GUYS TELL WE GET THE FULL REVIEW OF THE MARK III, I BEEN CHECKING DPREVIEW ON DAILY BASES FOR YEARS, I LOVE THIS SITE AND I COULDN’T FIND ANYWHERE BETTER TO HAVE SIMPLE CLEAR REVIEW, I BELIEVE A GOOD CAMERA IS THE ONE CAN ASSIST YOU IN A DIFFICULT SITUATIONS BUT THE D800 WHICH I HAVE BEEN USING FOR A MONTH NOW IS A NORMAL CAMERA, SO HERE WHERE I DISAGREE WITH DPR. THE CAMERA WORK GREAT UNDER A NORMAL CONDITIONS, I BELIEVE 83% IS FAIR,
I think the 82% is an internal error in their internal Percentage lookup table - 92% was meant which is far enough away from an Olympus D with 80%cheers/Charles
Gully Foyle: Having used a D800 for a week now, I'll post some cons that Nikon could have (and should have, IMHO) done better. Superb otherwise.- Record button not customizable. Record button redundant if g4 custom setting is set to Record Movies. Could at least double Mode button and reduce clutter- D7000/D3100 LV lever/record button combo much better. Record button placed on the back instead of top more logical since active only in LV- No ISO option set on any Fn buttons, except use first item from My Menu- No Color Space option set on any Fn buttons, except use first item from My Menu- Show ISO/Easy ISO feature (d7) hidden and irrelevant- Minor dial customization despite (yet another) increase of features- No small RAW options (MAJOR fault)- OVF Virtual Horizon useless in low light- Quiet mode not at all quiet- Not refined LV mode- LCD light sensor easy to cover, dropping brightness- AF switch/button combo a workaround in an obsolete design. SONY big knob implementation much better
May be some personal improvements but still an aamzing cam;/Charles
why only 82%??I Feel 85%/K
Christo256: Pretty disappointed with these samples. There are lots of lens reviews on the web so to make this review purely about the quality of the sensor the pictures need to be shot with the best lenses shot at their sweet spot and on a tripod otherwise one is confused as to what is making some of the low iso shots a little soft. I get sharper images from my 5d 2 than what I can see here but don't know if this is human error or an AA filter that is too strong?
Same with D800 samples - my impression is that other reviews show much better performance;/K
I never saw sharpening as filter in any cam-app - why?
Well seen and well done!
Ssempa: D800 vs 5D Mark III 6400 ISO Detail and Noise Comparison:
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/7368/31024752.jpgDing ding ding, D800 victory to me
Credits to imaging-resources.com
Fully agree, the imaging-resource shots to me are more informative;/K
Ilkka Nissilä: Nikon's rating of the D800 up to ISO 6400 and D4 up to 12800 seems justified; the D4 gives much lower color noise at ISO 12800 than the D800.
Nothing new under the stars.
Indeed and the D4'S target was ISO Performance and the D800's resolution. You will not shoot for highest resolution with D4 and not for highest ISO Performance with D800;cheers/K
William Belvin: Good to see these , but they're not great for comparing resolutions. They were shot at f/11, and are badly affected by diffraction. Nikon recommends shooting at f/8 or lower for best results. I'd suggest f/5.6 would be a better test. Incidentally the 645D is shot at f/18 and is also affected by diffraction, even with its large sensor.
Not only the Aperture but also the studio scene, much better visible on imaging-resource use comparometer ...