StevieF: It can't have an LCD screen on the back - to be truly retro, in its place it needs to have the equivalent of the little slot where I used to put the top of the film carton to remind me what the film speed & size was? I'm guessing there'll be a holder for the memory card case and/or the eyepiece cover.
Find yourself a back of a broken film SLR, a hacksaw and some superglue, then you got what you want. It even works on a D4!
Poster holds no liability for any irreversible damage to any DSLR modified by these instructions.
DRNottage: If it were up to me, it would have NO LCD screen. You want retro? That's retro. Wait until you download 'em until you can see 'em. There's your "filmic" experience! Damn camera would be cheaper too...
Seems to be one of the features of the DF that you can actually completely disable the LCD and the camera's advanced digital features. If that's what you want - or your battery is running low.
But I doubt that omitting the 25$ display would make the camera cheap enough to gain enough additional sales to compensate for the ones just lost due to the lack of the screen.
Scottish Kev: Is it me or does this also look very much like the New Olympus OM-D E-M1??
Bulky, not really pretty - true F-style.
But more reliable than you could ask for - drowned an F3 on a New Zealand hiking trip, dried it, kept working. If the DF lives up to that reputation and brings some nice manual photography features, especially regarding focusing, I'll be more than happy.
liquid stereo: Deck chairs on the titanic...
Oly/Pana/Fuji/Sony: Here are different/better offerings — ergo, sensor size, solution size, high ISO performance, etc. — at a lower price.
Nikon: Here's one of our cams — same features, in an angled body — for the same (high) price.
Canon: What's all this then?
OK then, slim Sony FF with all that "world-class" blue label overrated stuff. There hardly isn't any yet and what's already there or announced is boring, heavy and large.
And then just one moment, which stuff by what manufacturer? Sony? Those guys who failed to make anything wider than 18mm (27mm FF) for their NEX-system for years.
Have fun waiting for Sony's erratic and incomprehensible decisions what lens to make next. In the meantime you can have fun trying to adapt legacy lenses and exploring funny optical phenomena doing so.
Glad I never bought into any of Sony's crap. This also goes for any stuff outside of cameras and imaging. Sony are usually good at supplying basic tech (e.g. Trinitron CRTs or camera sensors) but their products generally suck. Poorly manufactured and overpriced.
Zvonimir Tosic: Judging by the shadow, it has a small grip?So it's not FM reborn. :-(
Nah, it's the digital ba$tard child of an F4 mating with an F3.
Don't get me wrong, I still have both my F3s and my F4 which are great cameras in their own ways. And if the DF brings along the best of these in a single package plus digital I'm fine. But design-wise it looks a little bit odd which may actually help bringing down the retail price soon... ;-)
Tomskyair: Looks like a digital hybrid between an F3 and an F4. Retro? Maybe 80ies retro but honestly I don't care at all what it looks like. Also don't care for lack of GPS, WiFi, 36+ MP, blazingly fast fps and full frame AF coverage.
About the only thing I'm interested in is: does this thing truly work with old non-AF Nikkor glass as the F3 or FE-2 used to? If the rumored feature of the foldable Ai tab for is true Nikon's engineers must have put some efforts into the usability of the DF with their MF legacy lenses. That's what I hope for.
Never been too happy with the manual focusing of my legacy Nikon glass on the D700 although that's been alleviated a little bit by a Katzeye screen. So I'd really like to see a digital body that handles this old glass well without outperforming its design limitations by some ultra high resolution sensor. If it's really the D4's sensor, good. May also explain the "dumbed down" other specs (AF, fps, shutter) as Nikon doesn't want to hurt D4 sales too bad.
I still hope this enormous viewfinder holds some pleasant surprise for us MF shooters (anyone said "focus peaking in OVF/EVF hybrid VF"?). I would also expect that old MF Nikkors truly handle like they used to on old film SLRs.
If the DF should fail in these regards then I also fail to see its very purpose. Would rather buy a D610 then.
babalu: To all interpreters , a question : what is the lever just below the index finger in the picture showing the back of the camera intended for ?
Seems to be the lever of the mode selector ring for the shooting mode (S, Cl, Ch, ST). Index marks are on the forward side of the shutter speed dial.
Looks like a digital hybrid between an F3 and an F4. Retro? Maybe 80ies retro but honestly I don't care at all what it looks like. Also don't care for lack of GPS, WiFi, 36+ MP, blazingly fast fps and full frame AF coverage.
JBurnett: It's a definite step in the right direction, particularly for a landscape photographer looking to pare down a hiking kit. Sony A7r + 24-70 f/4: 890g (about 2lbs). Nikon D800e + 24-70 f/2.8: 1900g (a bit over 4lbs). Size comparison at http://j.mp/1gnkm0J (and yes, I know it's f/4 on Sony and f/2.8 on Nikon, and no real way to compare IQ as yet).
It will take quite a while until this is a mature SYSTEM, with a good range of native lenses (if it EVER becomes one before the NEXT BIG THING). I suspect that the sensor will challenge all but the pricier adapted lenses. But there are plenty of photographers who own those. If tests with Leica and other quality lenses pan out, Sony will have a real hit.
Forget about using legacy glass on an A7. Using the tight E-mount which has been originally developed for APS-C sized sensors is about the most stupid thing Sony could have done. Take a frontal look at an A7 body without lens: the corners of the FF sensor undercut the bayonet ring. And any mount adapter is going to narrow down that orifice even further.
How the light-rays coming out of the rear element of a legacy SLR-lens at mirror box distance should make it around this obstacle to the sensor corners is something not to be found in the laws of optics. Apart from Leica and Voigtlaender M-mount glass I can't fathom any legacy lens being usable on an A7(r).
Pretty much sinks the system for me as stillborn. I don't want to depend almost exclusively on Sony's arbitrary and eccentric decisions on which lens to produce next. The lack of any SWA options for the NEX system for a long long time being prime or zoom has driven me to mFT. Not taking any chances here as well. Wait and see.
Anadrol: @yabokkie I think everyone here is sick of your trolling.
Maybe yabokkie should bump up his mental ISO if he thinks everything is so "sloooow"...
Tomskyair: If you think these things are big - wait until the FF NEX-style system arrives if it ever does. That system's lenses will make the new NEX lenses looking much smaller.
Maybe then the eager FF MILC adepts will eventually realize that a "faaaast" 2.8 standard zoom for FF is going to be huge and heavy regardless whether there's a mirror in the camera or not. "Where can I buy a large and heavy battery grip to balance this monster on my small and flimsy camera?"
Ever tried to cheat the laws of physics? Well, simply doesn't work as they are laws and not an opinion. And as APS-C is the second largest sensor format being used in consumer cameras it requires relatively large lenses especially when aiming at fast f-stops and decent quality.
Welcome, Mr. Equivalence Troll on Duty...
...but what's your point?
If you think these things are big - wait until the FF NEX-style system arrives if it ever does. That system's lenses will make the new NEX lenses looking much smaller.
It'll be interesting to watch how much the smartphones are going to cannibalize the P&S market in the near future.
My prediction is: pretty much totally up into the mid-range segment as technology advances further and results of an average smartphone and an average P&S will become almost indistinguishable from each other in 98% of shooting situations.
cfh25: Let's dream of a future headline:
"Google launches Adobe Collection for $149"
Keep on dreaming if you think Google bought Nik for their photographic software running on Mac OSX or Windows. All they were after is Snapseed Mobile. If I'd be a software developer in the Nik team I'd be looking for a new employer right now before Google s**tcans the entire product range in "focusing our efforts". As this is what they usually do after acquiring some innovative small developer.
"Don't be evil", I honestly think that this is one of the greatest deceptions of today's digital world. But still so many people just fall for it.
awb1000: I only use Photoshop on occasion, so I see no value for me in this. I had been thinking about moving from Aperture to Lightroom, but that's off the table now.
And they'll probably lose about ten times as many users by their latest move. Not to mention the major shipwreck they caused to their overall credibility and faith into their honesty.
We'll see whether those elitist "pros" willing to subscribe to Adobe's hostageware scheme are going to pay the bill at the end of day.
I'm really looking forward to these people's posts here that the latest increase for CC from 99 to 129$ per month is taking things "a little bit over the top".
It's all about the last laugh...
slncezgsi: Google, please, buy Adobe and bring Photoshop back to enthusiast photographers.
Keep on dreaming...
...and Google might pretty well be your worst nightmare then.
rasummers: Here is an interesting article about Adobe CC. http://terrywhite.com/5-myths-about-adobe-creative-cloud/
Terry White is the "softball(s)"...
...sorry, couldn't resist.
riveredger: Thinking aloud ... I think the way a lot of these posters feel is the way most people feel when they get the bill from their wedding photographer
Well, what does that tell us.
You better don't marry - waaaay too expensive.
And Adobe right now is quite a greedy bride with a bad attitude.
Sorry, s**w your proposition fat and ugly Adobe.
Diderot2: Who needs Adobe? I've got my Photoshop. If this ever gets too outdated there will be another program. What's more, I'm not going to a cloud for anything and I'm not storing anything on a cloud -- it leaves us (photographers especially) too vulnerable.
I want some protections, some rights, some privacy, some respect!
These companies better start asking what we consumers want. They think we're slaves but they're going to find out we don't need them after all. Then they'll be singing a different tune.
By the way, Adobe ain't what it used to be! Did you see that fourth rate artwork they sent out with that last CS promotion? The one with the "hair" artwork? It was putrid!
Dump crappy ACR; there's better stuff out there. And the best about it is:
It's not by Adobe GREED (TM).
Adrian Van: For most of us semi-pro or hobby enthusiast photographers and even some full pro photographers any one of the 64 bit versions of Photoshop starting at CS4 and later (was CS3 64bit?) is really all we will need for the next many number of years, so most are covered who have this.
Unless... you also use the ACR Raw features or need the latest and greatest because you work in advertising and marketing and commercial photography and are sharing layered files to others.How many of us actually need better than CS6 Photoshop anyway and need more upgrading (who are enthusiasts) which is a mature product already. Use other software for Raw conversion and there are lots out there and your existing PS should be fine for many years!
Why use Adobe's crappy ACR anyways? OK, its integration makes it more convenient and quicker to use. But that's about it.
As RAW converters C1 and DxO on the payware side do a much better job than ACR and there are also freeware alternatives such as rawtherapee and others.
I would be more concerned about CS6 falling behind in terms of OS compatibility. But then there's always a virtual machine being able to take care of that.
Get a weekly update of all that's new in the digital
photography world by subscribing to the Digital Photography Review