felixspencer: Thanks for this Nikon - I'll take one with the innards of a D7100 and pay you £1000 if that's ok. But seriously, I moved away fron Nikon ti the fuji x100 a while ago and would really like another DSLRto compliment my current camera, if this camera is just a flagship of a yet to be released new range then i am happy to wait until an ASP-C version is released.
I don't think the price will drop enough with an aps-c version. The tooling for the new body and assembly line is going to be a much higher cost than the price difference between sensors.
mike kobal: let's not think about the price and marketing hype for a moment. I think the Df will appeal to photographers who actually take pictures and own lots of af and af D glass. The 16mp sensor is far more forgiving then a 36mp sensor when paired with older generation Nikkor lenses. Suddenly you can shoot just like back in the film days again and as a bonus you can crank up the ISO beyond 100K. If you don't own legacy Nikkor lenses there really is no point getting one and no point getting upset about it.
Well, I don't see the advantage for people with af and af-d lenses, as the D800 and the D610 both have af motors. For people with ai and ais lenses, and older lenses, yes. As far as 16mp being more forgiving than 36mp - I don't get that either. If you are print the same size, then the D800 will just have more detail. That is all. The only argument that makes sense is the higher ISO. And still, the D800 is no slouch. D610 is also really good. I just don't see this being a big seller for Nikon. Not sure what is motivating it. Retro is cool, but not $3000 cool, not D800 price territory cool.
Looks interesting. Can't wait to get my hands on one in 5 years when I buy it on Ebay for $600 (after everyone realizes it looks cool (sort of) but is harder to use than the D610 and costs more).
UnChatNoir: Yes Nikon, what are you doing? After wandering a very fuzzy road of big, bulky and even bad DSLR's like the D600 I switched to the Fuji X-system.
I Didn't regret it for a minute, Fuji easily outperforms almost every Nikon equipped with the mainstream lenses and zooms, even FX.
Now this DF should wake up our 'wow, a Nikon' feeling again. I don't know. I expected a bit more than just this 16MP retro-attempt to get convinced in your brand again.
After your crappy D600, I fully lost all confidence btw. Do something real for your believers, come f.i. with a credible mirror less range.
Abrasive, Thanks for the grammar lesson. I hope you can understand what I meant (or is it understood what I mean). Yeah, some D600 owners are P.O. The internet is a curious place. It sometimes brings out the worst people and the worst in people. So you will always hear more people b-ing about a great product like the D600 than people who are enjoying it because people who like it just go out and shoot and don't worry about all the comments on the internet. So do some more research on the internet, I am sure you will find entire websites devoted to hating the D600. It will go on shooting great images. The D610 is virtually identical to the D600 with (presumably) an updated shutter mechanism. The only people who are worried are the ones who 1 - just like to complain, or 2 - just think about the resale value of equipment. I hope I didn't make any grammar mistakes this time, but I am sure you will let me know.
Cailean Gallimore: Nikon:
DSLRs - Very good.
DSLR Lenses - Very good.
DSLR Flashes - Very good.
Coolpix A - Not bad.
Everything Else - Lol.
Worlwide sales of interchangeable lens cameras -
DSLR - Very goodEverything Else - LOL
Are you kidding? The D600 was no where near bad and wastes your fuji x-system in almost every way. Yes, there was the over-hyped oil on sensor problem, but I think there were fewer people effected by this than most people think. But other than that, the D600 smokes you fuji system. And what is wrong with the 16MP sensor from the D4? One of the best sensors ever put in a camera. Yes, I question if this product will really sell that well for Nikon, but not for any of the reasons you mentioned.
I keep reading that this will be a low volume product. I don't know how we can assume that. Keep in mind that this is just a rumor right now and everything on the list is just speculation. All of it is subject to change, and to me the price is very suspect. Not gonna move many bodies for $3000. But the argument I keep seeing is that it will not have wide appeal. Well, it will have the same appeal that the x-pro1 has, which seems to be pretty wide, maybe more because of the F mount. Forget about excluding video, the Fuji's are not known for video either and people are still scooping them up. If they don't eff up the pricing, this could be a very good seller for them.
paulski66: This article picks and chooses info from a number of different posts on this rumored camera. Specifically, the "$3000 to $3300 price" speculation comes from a post that the author of Nikon rumors now says was based on fraudulent information.
As posted on NR: "I am now 100% sure that the D4H specifications [where the above quoted price figures came from] I posted yesterday were 100% fake."
Agreed. I think that price is way too high. I suspect this body to be much closer to the D610 territory, maybe even lower. If Nikon really wants to move bodies, they must keep pricing under control.
Wait, are we supposed to believe that DPR doesn't already have this body and have been testing it? I know they have to play dumb, just seems kinda weird that they post this like it is a surprise. I know they already have this body. I can't remember a major camera announcement over the past few years that didn't have a DPR "first impressions review" within a few hours of it being announced. I can only conclude that they have special access to these bodies.
brownie314: This will probably be a great lens. Although Nikon and Canon users already have options in this range and aperture. But I don't think f/4 lenses get the proper attention they deserve. Many photographers poopoo on them because they are not "fast enough". But these f/4 lenses can be made smaller and tougher than the larger f/2.8 companions. And with the ever increasing iso performance of bodies, f/4 is good enough many times. I personally wish Sigma or Tamron (or Tokina) would make a 50-150 f/4 lens for aps-c that is tough and weather sealed. I don't know of any options for a lens like this from anyone (well I don't know much about Pentax, maybe they do). But it could be made much smaller than the big 70-200 f/2.8 lenses most people mount on there aps-c dslrs, just because they don't have an option. And yes I know that there are 70-200 f/4 lenses, but 50mm is a much better place to start for aps-c than 70mm.
Yeah, I know Tokina used to make a 50-135 f/2.8, but not any more. And many times, I don't want or need f/2.8, so extra size is not worth it. And I figured Pentax made something in this range, but it doesn't do me much good. I also know that Sigma makes a 50-150 f/2.8, with is excellent from what I hear, but again it is as large as the 70-200 f/2.8 lenses. An f/4 lens would be more compact.
This will probably be a great lens. Although Nikon and Canon users already have options in this range and aperture. But I don't think f/4 lenses get the proper attention they deserve. Many photographers poopoo on them because they are not "fast enough". But these f/4 lenses can be made smaller and tougher than the larger f/2.8 companions. And with the ever increasing iso performance of bodies, f/4 is good enough many times. I personally wish Sigma or Tamron (or Tokina) would make a 50-150 f/4 lens for aps-c that is tough and weather sealed. I don't know of any options for a lens like this from anyone (well I don't know much about Pentax, maybe they do). But it could be made much smaller than the big 70-200 f/2.8 lenses most people mount on there aps-c dslrs, just because they don't have an option. And yes I know that there are 70-200 f/4 lenses, but 50mm is a much better place to start for aps-c than 70mm.
Toccata47: The only point that matters is autofocus speed...I may have missed it, but I didn't see any commentary on this.
@calking - that is good information. Thanks for sharing. I have not heard that before. I have tried several mirrorless and none has been fast enough for me. But I have not tried the latest generation of Olympus focus systems. I will have to check that out. It is really the main reason I have not gone mirrorless (other than my Nikon 1 system, which is pretty fast).
With my subjects, the difference between .5 sec and .2 seconds is the difference between getting an in focus shot and getting garbage. So I need the focus speed. I agree that computerized focus has potential to be much more accurate, but right now just is not as fast. I look forward to the day when mirrorless focus is blazing fast. We are close, just not quite there yet.
Well I don't agree that AF speed is all that matters (if it was we would all just buy dslrs right?). But yes, it is important - for me 2nd most important thing (behind IQ). Mirrorless cams are not at the same level as phase detect on dslrs for speed and tracking. But as the processors and techniques get more powerful, eventually they will be as fast. But today - right now - they are not as fast, which is why I still shoot a dslr.
brownie314: Inching closer and closer. I predicted a year ago that there would be a FF body that retails new for less than $1000 within 3 years. I got massive blow back saying that the sensors were too expensive, there was not market for it....on an on. But this new body is $1699? Getting close.
Yup. Improving cameras in phones are eating out the middle ground between tiny sensors and FF. Market is eroding for cameras that are not massively better than a cell phone (because average non-photographers don't care that much about small image improvements). But FF is massively better (perspective, DOF, high iso, IQ ...). So it is the future.
Miwok: If I want a small camera, I pick a 1" sensor. If I want a "better" IQ and possibility of shallow DOF, I take a DLSR.Sorry, but no need of Four Thirds or FF sensor for me. :(
m4/3 IQ close to latest round of 24mp aps-c sensors? I am not so sure about that. DR that can be drawn out of raw files - aps-c wins.
Griffo 155: Having read all the posts here on the latest from Nikon, it appears to me that you have to be a die hard Nikon to like this camera and what the company is doing..
I've said it before - I think they are lost and losing ground very quickly to Sony especially with Sony's latest A7 and A7R release plus the other manufacturers Fuji, Lumix, Pentax and Olympus who are being so innovative and are listening to their customers... These are dark days for Nikon I'm afraid... and I don't think Canon are in any better position - to be honest.
Well, I think you are missing the point. Caninkon are making cameras for people who like to take pictures. SonyOlyPaniFuji make cute cameras for people who like to pose with there camera and iphone in a conspicuous way. Bring you A7, or worse, your A7r - meet me at dawn - 10 paces, then turn and focus - my D7000 will destroy your Sony camera every time. I know there has been lots of innovation with on sensor PDAF and all of that, but PD with a mirror still has not been surpassed for speed and tracking. I know the day will come when this is not true, but today it is true. And guess what - if a picture is not in focus - I don't care how big your sensor or how many MP you have, it will still suck. So these "old looking" dslrs still have some life left in them.
Inching closer and closer. I predicted a year ago that there would be a FF body that retails new for less than $1000 within 3 years. I got massive blow back saying that the sensors were too expensive, there was not market for it....on an on. But this new body is $1699? Getting close.
All of these contrast or even on chip pdaf systems are no match for a proper phase detect af of even a low end dslr. I have a j1 and a v1. I like them, but then I get indoors in low light and remember how bad there focus systems are compared to my d7000. And high iso - forget about it - d7000 stomps my 1 system into the ground, but that is a different discussion.
JDThomas: I've had my D700 since the day it was released. I could get more than 50% of what I paid for it if I sold it today. The D600 is less than a year old and you will be lucky to get 50% of the price if you sell today (luckily I sold mine off about 3 months after buying it).
In 5 years what is the resale value going to be on a used D600 since Nikon basically stuck a scarlet letter on it?
In the long run Nikon has forced D600 owners to hold the bag on the loss. This is great for people who buy used cameras because the D600 isn't a bad camera per se, but used camera buyers aren't the ones keeping Nikon in business. Nikon basically thumbed their noses at their loyal customers by killing the resale value of the D600.
I'm not saying the D600 is a worthless camera, far from it. It's very good in many respects, but the market perception of the camera has killed it's value thanks to the manufacturer.
Shouldn't this "spotting" decrease over time? I mean really there is only so much oil and dust that can shed from the working components before they break. I don't have intimate knowledge of shutter mechanisms, but it seems to me that this can only go on so long, and there should be an exponential decrease in spotting, until it is no longer a problem. Maybe I am looking at it the wrong way.