During the Kickstarter campaign, the lens was available for $300 which is the max I would pay for it, as it is cool but limited use. Now, if you subscribe to the Lomo newsletters you will see that nearly every week they discount something for up to 25% or even 30%, so it is good to subscribe to them.
FoveonPureView: Pay ONLY (!) DOUBLE (!!) the price of the 16MP Df and buy a 40 MP MEDIUM FORMAT Pentax 645D instead. Nuff said.
As I wrote above, I like medium format but the Pentax is quite simply a pear compared to the Nikon's apple. Yes the resolution is high and that wonderful MF look is nice, but the DF will be far more at ease making action pictures or evening pictures.
What a strange comment. Mind, I love medium format cameras (I still shoot film mf cameras), but they are totally NOT suitable for the kind of photography that the DF will excel at.
Holger Drallmeyer: Oh give me a break now. There is just absolutely no point in emulating film. It's like making Filet Mignon out of chuck eye. Get a film camera and shoot some film if you like the look of it.
I use it irregularly since v1, and mainly for black and white. I find that digital black and white sometimes looks too clean, depending on the topic. The simulated grain that Filmpack injects looks very believable, reminding me of my darkroom days, it does not look like a basic filter. The grain can really improve the atmosphere of a picture. Just don't overuse it.
rick decker: I will stick with panos..not because I am philosophically opposed...just because it is another piece of hw/sw to deal with. I don't do any video to speak of so that doesn't matter.
So... why do you reply then?
It is lovely conspirational thinking that Nikon does everything to break 3rd party compatility when bringing out new cameras. If that were the case, old AF Nikkors would also have problems. But specifically on the DF they will work with full satisfaction.Fact is, pure and simple, Sigma reverse engineered the lens/camera interface and did so imperfectly. Otherwise these lenses would still work. Note that not all Sigma lenses have issues, if Nikon were really conspiring than all those other Sigma's, Tamrons, Tokinas would have problems as well - and as I mentioned older Nikkors too.The question should rather be: is a camera manufacturer obliged to open source it's camera/lens interface specs so that reverse engineering is not necessary? legally, oviously not. Morally? I don't think so either.
Tom_A: I used the same lens on my D200 and was always disappointed with it. IT was simply not sharp enough at 1.4 - why buy 1.4 lens if it is not reasonably sharp then. Perhaps it was a focus issue, I now realise. I had a much better experience with their EX10-20mm lens, slow aperture but good results.
Sorry the above was meant as a reply to another post.
Patco: Dear Nikon,
Please exert less effort on engineering 3rd party incompatibilities, and more effort on creating a high-end DX D300 replacement.
Very strange comment. A camera brand has no responsibility towards third party makers, they can evolve their cameras without informing these companies. Companies like Sigma etc have always been reverse engineering lens interfaces which was of course much simpler in the good old days of manual focus film cameras. Personally since I alsmost completely switched to Nikon lenses I have only good experience: quality and compatibility. I was recently tempted by a Samyang 35mm f1.4 to put on a recently acquired Nikon F3 film camera but it was so big that I stayed with a Nikon 35mm f2 AF lens on it.
HBowman: That's not fair NIKON ...
Why is it not fair? Nikon has no responsibility. They introduce and evolve their cameras and have no obligation to inform 3rd party lens makers. Companies like Sigma etc have always re-engineered the camera/lens interface. Of course in the old days of manual lenses that was not so difficult as now.
I used the same lens on my D200 and was always disappointed with it. IT was simply not sharp enough at 1.4 - why buy 1.4 lens if it is not reasonably sharp then. Perhaps it was a focus issue, I now realise. I had a much better experience with their EX10-20mm lens, slow aperture but good results.
Hugh Paterson: Sigma lenses have had problems before with some Nikon SLRs. The original Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM prime was a disaster on the Nikon D300. The hopeless focus inaccuracy with this combination, could not be fully eliminated even with the camera's focus fine-tuning option because it was not consistent over the entire focus range. It also overexposed for most of the aperture range by at least one stop.My conclusion, at the time, was that the design of the lens was the culprit when paired with this DX-sensor camera. I suspect that this lens's very wide rear element sited so close to the small reflex mirror of the DX-format D300 meant that much of the light from the periphery of the lens, when focusing/metering at full aperture simply bypassed the outer edges of the reflex mirror and did not reach the focusing screen. In other words, more light reached the image sensor during exposure, than reached the reflex mirror during focusing/metering.Maybe something similar here?
I have and enjoy the XE-1.The maximum iso in auto iso is a good improvement.
What would still be a very niceto have: focus peaking that works well in the OVF. Currently it is quite usable in the screen but too subtle in in the OVF. Also, extra colours for focus peaking.
Julian: A shame its only open to "professional photographers".
It is a filter, usually this will filter on quality. Like limiting story submissions for a book to published authors.
MarcMedios: All good (and an excellent quality) except for the lack of interchangeable lens. Who wants to take pictures with just the one lens that some anonymous designer chose for you in Japan?
Yeah well, Henri Cartier Bresson and Ralph Gibson barely changed lenses. Much of his career Helmut Newton shot with a Rolleiflex. Nobody on the board here makes pics of that quality.35 mm equivalent is fine for many walkaround applications. It is not for photographing wildlife.As an aside, my own favourite camera is still the Rolleiflex.
Richard Murdey: This is a nice looking and nicely engineered camera. Not really Fuji's fault that this is the ultimate hipster camera. But hipsterific it is, much to the detriment of the community.
flickr groups devoted to the X100 are filled with, in no particular order
1. selfies taken in the bathroom mirror2. shots of expresso, latte, and other cafe beverages3. moody black and white shots of uninteresting and random cityscape.4. shots of the the X100 itself, in various expensive cases, taken with a camera that is not the X100
Why would it matter to you of a certain "style" ofpeople like this camera? This would mot influence my choice.
hpy2bsal: I own a DSLR but I didn't want the bring a backpack of camera gear on a three-week trip through Europe. I bought the X100S specifically because of its compact size and f/2 lens.
I was very nervous whether the 23mm fixed lens would work under all shooting circumstances but there wasn't a single time I wished I had brought a different camera. Whether I was shooting the interior of Notre Dame at night, the expanse of the Swiss Alps, the UCI Road World Championships along the streets of Florence during a torrential thunderstorm, or one of my meals at dinner, my X was the perfect camera. I probably could have sold three X's to fellow tour members once they saw the quality of my images. Attached to the Black Rapid SnapR 35 Bag and Strap and slung diagonally across my chest, my X was super lightweight and easily accessible. Even when handheld, I barely noticed the weight of the camera.
I'm already planning another trip to Europe next year and my X will be the only camera I'm bringing.
Yeah well, Henri Cartier Bresson and Ralph Gibson barely changed lenses. Much of his career Helmut Newton shot with a Rolleiflex. Nobody on the board here makes pics of that quality.35 mmequivalent is fine for many walkaround applications. It is not for photographing wildlife.
techPro: Big bulky and too expensive better to get the EM1 or G7.
Let us see a real test before assuming how the focus will be be. It is however a much more realistic assumption that the big and sensitive sensor will allow to make pictures that are simply impossible on those small sensor cameras. Not to mention having much better bokeh for a given viewing angle.
I like the mostly traditional controls of my Fuji XE-1, in a way they give me similar pleasure as shooting with my old Nikon FM2, F3 and F301 camera's. Simple and to the point.
This DF however, it is a camera that I wanted to like but it looks too much of a good thing to me in use, I am not convinced if it really is that user-friendly. Something to try in the shop.
As an aside, the most pleasant user interface I ever encountered on an slr was likely on the Leica R8 & R9: one button was one function, and done in a very simple and logical way. It was in other aspects quite a heavy beast but the usability was splendid, and in my opinion still a reference in that matter. Sometimes I am tempted to pick one up 2nd hand.
Yes these are smaller, in all other aspects the df obliterates them. This high quality full frame sensor allows for images that are impossible with your non-competitors...
First impression from the sneak peaks is a camera that offers a sensible blend of traditional controls and modern features.
I currently mainly use the fuji xe1 and next to the IQ the traditional controls were a big selling point to me.