Previous news story    Next news story

Nikon video hints at long-desired 'digital FM'

By dpreview staff on Oct 25, 2013 at 19:20 GMT

The rumors of Nikon creating a stripped-down, film-era-style camera are exciting - not least because it's something people have been calling for, for years. Until recently, the very idea of one of the big camera makers going down that route would have seemed unlikely - after all, you don't get to push technology forward by looking back.

Nikon Rumors has been reporting possible specifications all week. Some interesting bits of information that were first reported include:

- The name will be: "Nikon DF"
- No video 
- Announcement in early November 
- Expected price tag: $3,000 for body only, $3,300 with 50mm lens 

A couple of factors now make it seem real. Firstly, the rapid collapse of the compact camera market has left camera manufacturers looking for new niches to exploit. Secondly, Fujifilm has shown (with its hugely successful X100) that there's a market for a camera with pre-digital-era controls and looks.

Looking at Nikon specifically, the Coolpix A shows the company is now paying attention to photo-enthusiast niches that it has ignored for a long time. Whether it thinks there are significant profits to be made in these niches or because it would help burnish the company's credentials as a maker of products for photographers, it would make sense for Nikon to produce a product that plays on its heritage (especially since it's Sony's RX1 and Fujifilm's X100 that are tugging at the purse strings of photographers).

If the rumors do prove to be true, we can only hope Nikon will balance the desire to look back while including some updated camera ergonomics, which have come a long way since the Nikon F3 and FM. We hope such a camera ends up classically-inspired, rather than a slavish throw-back.

This week Nikon released a short teaser video and ad campaign for a "pure photography" camera adding fuel to the flame. 

'It's in my hands again' - Nikon teaser video

Is this the camera you've been waiting for? Or are there cheaper, better options already on market? 

Update: Nikon Rumors now believes some of its previously-reported specifications to be 'fake'.

Source: Nikon Rumors

Comments

Total comments: 554
2345
foto guy
By foto guy (6 months ago)

I love the idea of this camera and would buy it in a second if the price wasn't so astronomically out of line.

5 upvotes
groucher
By groucher (6 months ago)

Congratulations Nikon marketing boys - it took a long time but you've finally got the message.

5 upvotes
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (6 months ago)

Yeah. They replied to the D400 message perfectly

5 upvotes
dpmaxwell
By dpmaxwell (6 months ago)

I think to make this really work, you should have to open up the back in order to change the ISO.

20 upvotes
skytripper
By skytripper (6 months ago)

$3,000 for such a camera is just plain nuts!

14 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

I think it is just salted nuts.

1 upvote
rondom
By rondom (6 months ago)

I expect this to be part of the "retro-looks" trend, and I think this will be its only connection with the past cameras: the look of the shell...hope I am wrong.

2 upvotes
rondom
By rondom (6 months ago)

He looks rather depressed for someone with a dream comes true camera...

3 upvotes
Model Mike
By Model Mike (6 months ago)

Must have been the mosquitos...

0 upvotes
John
By John (6 months ago)

He's Scottish. We're all depressed. Have you tried living here ;-))) ...and it's midges, not mosquitos ;-)

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
10 upvotes
Boxbrownie
By Boxbrownie (6 months ago)

It's nice to dream, but if it's true and it looks and handles as well as an FM/FE/Nikkormat etc......I'll advance order it tomorrow, hear that Nikon?

Now go make it!

7 upvotes
aalaref
By aalaref (6 months ago)

can't wait to see this camera , finally nikon is doing the right thing

12 upvotes
HawaiiVolcanoes
By HawaiiVolcanoes (6 months ago)

You know...when i think of the camera market today..with a few exceptions...i think of the old Pink Floyd Lyrics "36 channels of shi† on tv to choose from"

4 upvotes
Tap0
By Tap0 (6 months ago)

It is thirteen, not thirty six.

0 upvotes
MPA1
By MPA1 (6 months ago)

All still cameras should be like that.

1 upvote
HawaiiVolcanoes
By HawaiiVolcanoes (6 months ago)

we are "getting wound up"..because quite frankly we hate Nikon ...they stopped being relevant in the (anything other than DSLR market) a VERY long time ago....VERY long time ago...and we don't like the cameras that are currently on the market. If you ask any REAL photographer if they would like input on a new camera ..they would "jump" to do so...because...no single camera out there gives anyone with brains what they really want. Period

3 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (6 months ago)

I think a Pentax K-3 might.. My K-5 is much better ergonomically than my two D800e's

0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

@HawaiiVolcanoes
No single camera will ever give all photographers what they really want. It's good when there are many types of camera - not every manfacturer trying to make the same thing.

@bossa
When if finally comes it will be interesting to see what the Penax full frame DSLR is like. A K3 with a full frame sensor would be nice.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Burbclaver
By Burbclaver (6 months ago)

I like the sound of Pure photography - Take a D800, but smaller with no video. Set autofocus, aperture, shutter speed, ISO and white balance using on-camera controls. Dispense with the rear display all together (you can review your pictures when you "develop" them on computer). I'd keep the bracketing button, because of this, but I always bracket manually.

Removing the display also allows you to get rid of image review, trash button, image lock button, zoom in and out buttons, OK and live view buttons. Keep the top LCD, so you can see limited menus and set date/time etc. Vastly reduce the custom features and totally remove the retouch menu. I'd keep picture controls for the JPEg shooters.

2 upvotes
BartyLobethal
By BartyLobethal (6 months ago)

Yours is one of a number of posts hoping that the rear display is not included. I don't share your point of view. I think one of the major advantages of digital over film is the ability to review your images in-field, make any needed adjustments and shoot again. I won't purchase a digital camera that doesn't allow image review. If they dispense with the rear LCD and make image review possible via the EVF, that might be a compromise I'd be willing to make.

7 upvotes
groucher
By groucher (6 months ago)

EVF is a great way to review images if you need to do that, and to select menus, particularly if you're a bit short sighted as I am. I use the V1's EVF in preference to its display for that reason. Getting rid of the rear display also means that the camera can be used with an ever-ready case which is useful in showery weather.

4 upvotes
edu T
By edu T (6 months ago)

There is another reason Nikon might want to dispense with the rear LCD.

It's not related to nostalgia/ shooting method/ user-interface aspects; rather, it would allow them to shave off at least a couple of millimeters of the thickness, in order to make the camera look & feel more like the svelte FM/FM2 than like "molten lump of black plastic"-styled DSLRs.

Actually, they didn't really have many trimming options, as current sensor assemblies, with their filters, circuit board, etc, are way thicker than film+pressure plate (see this enlightening photo of a tore-down D600 sensor assembly, http://d3nevzfk7ii3be.cloudfront.net/igi/XRu3PELglKpWsdSc.huge , courtesy www.ifixit.com), and I suppose the 46 mm or so F-mount flange distance isn't to be messed with...

Comment edited 8 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

@ edu T
Leica M9 (digital) 138 x 80 x 37 millimeters
Leica M7 (film) 138 x 80 x 34 millimeters
So it looks like only 3 millimeters extra thickness over a film camera is needed to accommodate sensor and rear LCD

0 upvotes
edu T
By edu T (6 months ago)

@ CFynn
Agreed, it's just that forgoing those 3 mm might be crucial for the camera to feel like an FM in your hands (and there are lots of happy FM owners around).
On a 2nd thought, a possible solution to make up for an extra 3 mm would be to make the lens mount barrel protrude 3 mm more from the front, keeping the rest of the body as thin as an FM. But, alas, then the pentaprism/mirror would also need to be shifted forward...

0 upvotes
SergeAP
By SergeAP (6 months ago)

Nikon please sell me a K-3 Focusing Screen for D800 and I will immediately happy. And do what you want.

3 upvotes
AEndrs
By AEndrs (6 months ago)

www.focusingscreen.com
I have the K3 in my D300s and works perfectly.

0 upvotes
SergeAP
By SergeAP (6 months ago)

Unfortunately, the original K-3 is not the right size, and can not be set to D800 (but easily mounted to D300)

0 upvotes
AEndrs
By AEndrs (6 months ago)

Ahh.. that's a shame. I plan to upgrade to a D600 or D800, do you know if there is a viable alternative?

0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

The D800 focusing screen is difficult to change and adjust.

Canon 6D has interchangeable screens

I hope this Nikon DF has this too

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (6 months ago)

If it is well built, solid, with top Q sensor (rumor is D4's), I'm interested. Price rumor was discredited by NR, so no one knows about it yet, unless DPR have just given it out (you actually know about it, dont you?).

2 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (6 months ago)

No one involved in writing this story has been briefed about anything discussed in it.

We're simply reporting what had been published - the point is a discussion of that concept - regardless of whether any of it turns out to be true.

3 upvotes
Tap0
By Tap0 (6 months ago)

How are your first impressions of the camera ? I know that you have been playing with it all day.

0 upvotes
ABM Barry
By ABM Barry (6 months ago)

Why are good folks getting wound up and personal about the possible features?
There are no hard facts yet.
You can't hang someone based on gossip. (We would all be dead!)

Lets just wait for the truth to emerge, form our very own personal thoughts on the camera.

Lets not spoil and hurt other good folks dreams and desires.

I have a friend who recently bought a Hasselblad Luna. I was so tempted to offer him my un-requested personal thoughts on this camera. However, he was so excited about his new acquisition, I didn't have the heart or the right to tell him that Santa isn't real!

If we all listened and made our decisions in life based on everyone else's opinions, I wonder where we would be?

"There has never been a statue erected to a critique"
Enjoy and have a productive day., ..... Baz

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (6 months ago)

NR usually gets it right with Nikon's releases.

0 upvotes
itchhh
By itchhh (6 months ago)

If Nikon builds this camera with a metal body and they follow the tradition of Leica and a minimalist approach, you bet I'm buying one. If this camera is what I think it will be, it will be my last. Less is more provided its quality.

15 upvotes
jkrumm
By jkrumm (6 months ago)

All of these hipster white guy photographer ads make me want to be as unhipsterish as possible when taking photographs. Can't help the white guy part.

9 upvotes
GiovanniB
By GiovanniB (6 months ago)

Somtimes I take my FE2 out of the cabinet just to turn the dials, try the switches and press the DOF lever while looking through this magnificent viewfinder with its analog needle metering indicator and mechanical mode thumb. Boy, do I wish to have this kind of immediate controls on a digital SLR.

And I don't even wish that to cost less than a present full frame DSLR. Not just the FM3a, but all of the FM/FE series, not even to mention the F3, weren't exactly cheap in their era either.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
Liviu Namolovan
By Liviu Namolovan (6 months ago)

Lack of video is a bonus. But 3000 price tag is outrageous. And this when a 24Mp FF A7 Sony (similar style camera) is only $1700! It's an insult from Nikon after the D600/D610 insult (not to mention the not acknowledged D800 left AF problem)! If it will prove to be true that insulting $3000 price, then I'll sell all my Nikon gear and I'll never look back. Similar cameras will be launched. Thanks to Fuji's brilliant initiative to launch their successful X100 we are now in position to choose because the other companies now realized that classic/retro style is selling. And Fuji just demonstrated once again by introducing the new firmware for their discontinued X100 that they are respecting their customers. Nikon learned nothing from this if 3000 $ price tag proves to be true. I'll wait for another offer from a more serious companiy and will go with a decent one.

2 upvotes
filipe brandao
By filipe brandao (6 months ago)

How can a camera that hasn't been announced have a price tag? Unless DPreview knows better, Nikonrumors already acknowledged the 3000 "price tag" was a fake rumor.

1 upvote
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (6 months ago)

You got it, DPR knows the price.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (6 months ago)

No one involved in writing this story has been briefed about anything discussed in it.

We're simply reporting what had been published - the point is a discussion of that concept - regardless of whether any of it turns out to be true.

The $3000 wasn't a 'fake rumor' it was a rumour. Regardless of whether Nikonrumors is still putting any faith in it, they publicized that rumour and we're discussing it.

6 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

FM3a was ¥100,000 - or about $1,000 - when it was launched 12 years ago. Add the cost of inflation over the past 12 years plus the cost of an FX sensor and all the other parts needed to make it digital.

If this camera is made to the same standard as the FM3a was, don't expect it to cost anything less than $2,500 - $3,000 maybe more.

If it is any cheaper, I suspect they will have cut corners somewhere.

0 upvotes
Hwirt
By Hwirt (6 months ago)

A camera like this would have been ideal at the start of the digital age and would have eased the transition by looking and feeling familiar, but now I don't see the logic. Other than looking cool in a nostalgic way it would likely be a step or several steps backward in ergonomics and functionality. If nostalgia is what you want there are plenty of beautiful film cameras available on the used market. Perhaps there are some who would like this but at best it will be a niche product.

0 upvotes
Burbclaver
By Burbclaver (6 months ago)

I think you're probably right.

0 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (6 months ago)

How niche can it really be with this kind of massive response on DPReview and the rumour sites?

1 upvote
joejack951
By joejack951 (6 months ago)

At the "start of the digital age" Nikon had the F5 and F6 which look an awful lot like their DSLRs of that period and today. This is a throwback camera, like many other cameras on the market today.

0 upvotes
reginalddwight
By reginalddwight (6 months ago)

Thank you for the story, DPR. Better late than never.

What's old is new again. Retro styling for the hipsters, but a throwback for the boomers.

0 upvotes
SergeAP
By SergeAP (6 months ago)

I am a very long time waiting for this event, but when it started I was very bored. Why is it always the case?

6 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

I absolutely love this comment and will save it.

4 upvotes
xtoph
By xtoph (6 months ago)

I dont understand the article comment about ergonomics improving since the fe2. Sounds to me like they are already missing the point. Aside from the focus turning the wrong way on nikons (:p), the fe/m2 were almost perfect cameras ergonomically speaking. Getting back to that is what such a camera should mostly be about.

I suspect that nikon is hoping to tap a market of folks who are sick of the upgrade cycle, who want to go back to buying a single camera to use without anxiety for a decade or so. Build in the quality construction, and at this point there are off the shelf pieces which could deliver more than ood enough quali pics for that kind of time frame. At which point the cost makes sense, becomes a rational investment rather than a two year tax on keeping up with the state of the art.

This could be brilliant for them--extremely well timed in terms of current capabilities, market saturation, and getting in while sony still doesnt have the stable of relevent lenses on offer.

2 upvotes
BJN
By BJN (6 months ago)

Perfect? I suppose that's as much opinion as anything else, but I daresay that a camera without at least some grip on the right is harder to hold securely.

Forget focusing direction, I'll never fully get used to Nikon's oddball backasswards lens mount. I suppose it should be endearing in a quaint, retro way, but not for me.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (6 months ago)

The comment was more a reference to the F3. It's a beautifully engineered piece of kit but the ISO and exposure compensation controls are not exactly up to contemporary levels of convenience (understandably, given how infrequently you needed to change film speed).

The point is simply that simply copying something old isn't the same as taking the best elements of the older item with some of the developments that have been made subsequently.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (6 months ago)

History: Nikon followed the Zeiss tradition, Canon, Leitz's. Very simple, not oddball at all.

0 upvotes
nnowak
By nnowak (6 months ago)

What is with this immense hatred of video capability? That's fine if you don't want to use, just ignore that little red button on the back of the camera. The addition of video capabilities have boosted DSLR sales volume to the point that allow for D600s and D800s to be sold at such low prices. Remove video and the camera price goes up.

Furthermore video advancements and live view enhancements go hand in hand. Shooting live view with a tilt shift lens is bliss compared to trying to compose with and optical viewfinder.

From my perspective adding video has only made my still photography capabilities better with absolutely no downside.

13 upvotes
BJN
By BJN (6 months ago)

I don't get it either...as long as the controls don't get in the way.

2 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (6 months ago)

That's just it, you don't get it. (a) that "little red button" gets in the way, when it could instead function as a stills feature (ISO etc) and (b) frankly put, when I buy an SLR I don't think (in a Gomer Pyle voice), "well GAWLEE and Shu-ZAM! I can make a YouTube clip of my dog's unit for my cuzin' Ned."I buy it because and ONLY because of the PICTURES I can get from it, NOTHING else, anything that doesn't have to do with that pollutes the interface & doesn't belong there. Maybe other people do buy SLRs for YouTube clips--to me, they're shopping for the food equivalent of fast food & SLR to me isn't a fast food business. Let them buy a Coolpix or a 1-series Nikon if they want YouTube clips with their camera.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 11 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
riveredger
By riveredger (6 months ago)

@larrytusza. Your comments about making videos for "YouTube clips", etc are sophomoric. Have you ever tried to make an engaging film with your camera? It is much more involved than taking a still photo. Try it sometime, then measure your work against some of the finely filmed clips on the internet - it might change your perception of "letting them buy a Coolpix" ...

Full disclosure - I have tried video and I suck at it. But it made me realize that it takes a ton of skill, practice and patience to make a film that other folks would find engaging or even mildly entertaining :-)

5 upvotes
cinemascope
By cinemascope (6 months ago)

@larry
You know what? Enough!
You selfish pricks!
Video people were confined to tiny crappy sensors for years. We finally get to use nice lenses for our ART and you selfish pricks can't leave us alone. And Youtube WTF?
Why don't you go back to using tiny sensors and a life without RAW. Or try to picture a life where you had to pay five digits just so you could get an APSC sensor and TIFF files to play with.
Anyway we still have a long way to go as we are still begging for RAW, stuff that you spoiled brats take for granted. Video capability takes NOTHING away from you!
JUST LEAVE US TF ALONE!

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

When the Nikon FM2 was available - so was the F100 and many other cameras loaded with features. There was a market for both types of camera then, so why shouldn't there be today?

1 upvote
Marek Rucinski
By Marek Rucinski (6 months ago)

I just can't wait to see what "pure photography" means apart from disabling video capabilities in the camera firmware.

6 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

I can only guess they are removing the LCD, adding a frame advance lever and only allowing 36 shots per memory card.

1 upvote
justmeMN
By justmeMN (6 months ago)

It's not really retro unless it has a film advance lever. :-)

3 upvotes
audijam
By audijam (6 months ago)

and loading a roll into the back of the camera!

0 upvotes
BJN
By BJN (6 months ago)

Clearly you're too young to appreciate true retro, which isn't a rapid advance lever, it's a pair of knobs to wind and rewind.

0 upvotes
Kevin Purcell
By Kevin Purcell (6 months ago)

Clearly you're too young to appreciate true retro which isn't knobs it's a glass plate holder (and a viewfinder on the back of the camera :-) )

1 upvote
skogredd
By skogredd (6 months ago)

What did they shoot the video with?

I used an FM2 as backup in film days and liked it, but today a camera without ok video capability is not worth for me lugging around.

And with THAT shutter-sound is scares away wildlife.

And why will it be so expensive?

2 upvotes
atamola
By atamola (6 months ago)

On my D700/800 (and other Nikons too) I can use knobs and rings to set
- Aperture
- Shutter speed
- ISO
- focus

At the moment few cameras can compete with the D800 in terms of IQ

Sorry guys. I just don't get it.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

Because IQ is not everything but for many the enjoyment of shooting is enhanced with a simple manual camera. Sometimes the journey is as important as the result.

All DSLRs have manual controls but few if any external dials for Shutter Speed and EV Compensation like the X-Pro1 or FM2.

I can also tell you that pressing the +/- EV comp button and rotating the command dial on my D800 is not as easy as rotating the EV comp dial on my X-E1. Both are really fun cameras, but there is something very satisfying about the X-E1.

Besides, Nikon users have been literally asking for a digital FM2 for years. If the DF is redundant for you, it may not be for someone else. It's about choices.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
atamola
By atamola (6 months ago)

I have an X100, a 50 year-old Voigtländer, and a Nikon F100. I use them all.

The biggest advantage of the X100 is size for the image quality and the 1/4000 sync speed. That’s real value.

2 upvotes
Mescalamba
By Mescalamba (6 months ago)

And obviously you can focus by hand with high accuracy, can you?

dSLRs are very poor to use in manual mode, most of them is pretty clumsy for this, cause they are made to be either semi-auto or full-auto everything.

There is very few dSLRs that at least meter right with fully manual lens. And if you throw custom focusing screen in the mix, it might go even worse.

Sure there are exceptions, but shooting with manual focus lens on dSLR is mostly pain.

Obviously mirrorless cameras have advantage here, from released and sold, A99 is best choice. And new A7/r seems as very good choices too.

And this Nikon? Well, who knows.. if they make it 100% usable with AiS lens, I wont need new camera until they progress somewhere near 60 mpix.

Or ever..

1 upvote
BJN
By BJN (6 months ago)

Unless it has a retro focusing screen with manual focusing aids, I don't see the appeal of a styling exercise. No, the rangefinder indicator is not a good substitute. It's driven from phase-detect sensors with their inaccuracies in size, position, and calibration. Make the focusing screens interchangeable for the folks who can't deal with split image/microprism focusing.

3 upvotes
atamola
By atamola (6 months ago)

That in part is my point. I get it, having a nice-looking camera may entice some people -but we are no longer concerned with photography.

What matters is that camera contributes to better pictures. An unassuming black x100 helps you to get closer without disturbing your subjects. But it's not the looks. Those subjects are equally undisturbed by other looks.

Nothing in what it's being discussed tells me that it's going to be a better camera to take pictures -as oppose to brag about or satisfy the lust for a new purchase for the sake of purchasing.

If Nikon comes with a better camera in the proper sense and charges accordingly -am all for it.

On the other hand, if it is mostly cosmetics -well, count me out.

At the moment nothing makes think that they are about to release a better camera -from the perspective of photography that is.

0 upvotes
sdribetahi
By sdribetahi (6 months ago)

Old people and bird shooters don't want video on their camera because they think it drives up the cost with a feature they don't use. So now you get a $3000 camera and no video. This is why we can't have nice things. Thanks for nothing.

6 upvotes
LarryK
By LarryK (6 months ago)

No one's forcing you to buy it.

Youth is not a virtue, if you're lucky you'll grow out of it.

7 upvotes
Juck
By Juck (6 months ago)

Don't waste the keystrokes Larry.

1 upvote
LarryK
By LarryK (6 months ago)

Non pejorative response goes here.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

@sdribetahi
I don't think too many bird shooters will be using this - at least not for photographing the feathered kind of birds.

0 upvotes
Nikkoro
By Nikkoro (6 months ago)

It's a year since Nikon V2 have been introduced. So it's time. Possible Nikon will come up with two or three new cameras. Olympus e-m1, Sony A7 and Fujifilm with x-e2 show the trend. New Nikon may look close to Sony A7 with controls like Fuji x-e2. imho :)

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (6 months ago)

Get your AIS Nikkors from the auction site now. Just like with C-mount lenses after the Black Magic Cinema camera, after this announcement people are going to charging an arm and a leg for the same AIS Nikkors that have been available so often at bargain prices.

As for video I'd be surprised if this Digital Fusion camera didn't have some kind of basic video capabilities. I get the whole "pure photography" catchline, but the video capabilities are already on the Expeed 3 chip. Why add video capability to potentially widen its user base?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Damo83
By Damo83 (6 months ago)

Cute video.

1 upvote
vFunct
By vFunct (6 months ago)

It would be genius of Nikon if they actually did come up with a cheap FF digital camera with manual controls.

One thing about cameras like the FM2 is that they were SUPER cheap.

A digital version of a Nikon FM2 needs to be super cheap as well. I would hope Nikon targets a sub $1000 price for this. (Maybe they can make more money selling the lenses instead.)

Also, we don't need video at all. SLR cameras are exactly the WORST type of body for video, because they have their grips close to their center of gravity, providing a quick, responsive axis of rotation - you can flick the camera instantly to get a shot.

The negative side effect of this is that it introduces instability - dSLR videography is known for it's excessively violent shakiness, and no professional shoots dSLR video without some sort of shoulder mount or stabilization system, ever.

A beginner would likely not know this and how to stabilize, thus making video a pointless lost cause for a beginners SLR.

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
King Penguin
By King Penguin (6 months ago)

Cheap? Not in UK they weren't......nikon's have always been expensive, along with their glass; and at that time they were far more unaffordable than modern plastic DSLRs today......get real.

4 upvotes
Colin Hartley
By Colin Hartley (6 months ago)

Correct, bought my black FM2 in 84 and think it was £349.99 body only.
An OM10 was about £100 and an OM2n around £300 body only.

1 upvote
jhinkey
By jhinkey (6 months ago)

Super cheap?
The FM2 had a list price of $364 in 1982 - that's $889 in 2013 $. In 1988 it was $525 ($1,045 in 2013 $). In 1995 it was $745 ($1143 in 2013 $).

Why does it have to be the same relative price as an FM2?
If the rumored configuration is true you'd get a much more capable camera that has:
- Variable ISO
- 16MP (about what you can really get out of a slide)
- Autofocus
- Variable white balance (no color filters!)
- No film costs
- High ISO that beats any film
- Instant image review
- OVF/EVF combo that's likely a way better system
- F-mount that can use hundreds of discontinued and existing lenses (and some alt lenses)
- Roughly the same size as FM2, F3, FM3A, etc. (smaller than current DSLR)

So the thing better cost more than an FM2 in today's $$ - it's a heck of a lot of capability that an FM2 never had hopefully in a similarly designed size.

0 upvotes
CFynn
By CFynn (6 months ago)

An FM3a was ¥100,000 when it was launched 12 years ago - so that wasn't SUPER cheap.

The FM10 was cheap - but that body wasn't even manufactured by Nikon

I'd rather something like the FM3a

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

I'm sure this will be nice since this retro thing is something Nikon does well (see S3 and SP replicas). But when I got my D700, I tired my favorite old Nikkkors and most of them were not that great on FF digital.

0 upvotes
slncezgsi
By slncezgsi (6 months ago)

0.85x viewfinder and focusing screen optimised for manual focus and it could be VERY interesting ...

5 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

.85? Should be 1.0 if it is going to be designed around a small niche like this.

0 upvotes
ABM Barry
By ABM Barry (6 months ago)

This could be perfect. I have a dedicated video camera which is so far ahead of a DSLR to use, I'm happy to drop the Vid function for better Stills function.

For those that have used a cheap Air Brush, then moved to a Pro high quality hand piece will understand the difference is huge. Just the feel and extra control allows us to create so much better results.

Simply put: I'm far more productive with a camera I like that I can forget about during a shoot rather than one that constantly reminds me of it's short-comings at every opportunity.

If this camera arrives in the form that it's hinting at, a lot of photographers will discover a new friend and open up their latent talent.

2 upvotes
KariIceland
By KariIceland (6 months ago)

And who wants a back focusing retro camera?
Besides "pure" photography means using wet plates.

Comment edited 53 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
HawaiiVolcanoes
By HawaiiVolcanoes (6 months ago)

Wow....giving Photographers what they actually want instead of "telling them what they want"...WHAT A FRIKKIN CONCEPT" !!

it must be the "End TImes"

btw..the name.."DF" is...über lame

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
brudy
By brudy (6 months ago)

This is exactly what I want. A pure FF, small camera with OVF and manual controls, including aperture rings on lenses. Literally a digital FE2.

8 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (6 months ago)

I have wanted this for YEARS.

It's something that would also be great for photo students as there's nothing equivalent to a Pentax K1000 today digitally.

...although that price is a real turn off.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

You are going to ask photo students to spend $3300 on a kit?!?!

Hilarious.

3 upvotes
filipe brandao
By filipe brandao (6 months ago)

The price is fake. It's a rumor remember? And Nikonrumors has already said its fake.

0 upvotes
mister_roboto
By mister_roboto (6 months ago)

hence "...although that price is a real turn off."

Although some students have too much money to burn.

1 upvote
DonSantos
By DonSantos (6 months ago)

I think the expected price rumor was already debunked by nikonrumors themselves

5 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (6 months ago)

Our point is simply that this is what was being reported and asking your opinions. The nature of rumors is that they're not 100% reliable - which is why we're explicitly discussing a rumor, not stating anything as fact.

5 upvotes
paulski66
By paulski66 (6 months ago)

Yes, but Nikon Rumors said they are now 100% certain this rumor was 100% false. That means the $3,000 price is no longer a rumor, but simply a made-up lie.

0 upvotes
victorragusila
By victorragusila (6 months ago)

anyone else find it funny that they made a very pretty movie to promote a camera that is proud of its lack of video capabilities?

7 upvotes
tkbslc
By tkbslc (6 months ago)

Not really. They make nice videos for thousands of other products that don't create video.

5 upvotes
LarryK
By LarryK (6 months ago)

The good thing about video is that if one takes enough of it, they're are eventually bound to get a good frame or two.

1 upvote
AEndrs
By AEndrs (6 months ago)

yes, as funny as the video advertisements for beer and toothpaste, and guess what? they don't shoot video! isn't that ironic? a video for a beer without video capabilities!

2 upvotes
victorragusila
By victorragusila (6 months ago)

lol yes, because we expect beer and toothpaste to be able to shoot video nowdays.

The point is this camera is for people who are very proud of their TRUEE PHOTOGRAPHEERR!! status, and dont want to be associated with all these young people and their video capable plastic toys (see the guy under my comment for a good example). And they use a good video to appeal to these people.

This is why I find it ironic that they use a video to advertise this particular camera, not any other product.

0 upvotes
larrytusaz
By larrytusaz (6 months ago)

No video? I'm in on that very principle alone.

10 upvotes
Johnsonj
By Johnsonj (6 months ago)

I'm not opposed to it. I'll give it a look over. Would love a full frame P&S. RX1 needs to come down a bit in price and add an electronic viewfinder and now we're in business.

1 upvote
Wenetu
By Wenetu (6 months ago)

Are you speaking about the new A7R?

2 upvotes
Johnsonj
By Johnsonj (6 months ago)

@ Wenetu...I'm speaking about any camera that gives me what I want as my ultimate P&S: Full frame, small in size, fast 35 or 50mm lens, built in electronic viewfinder, fast focus, etc. So far the RX1 comes closest, but if A7 can be outfitted with a small 35 or 50 to keep the overall size down, then that might be the one. Not familiar w/ Sony lenses.

0 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (6 months ago)

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.

2 upvotes
t3mujin
By t3mujin (6 months ago)

Just a small correction, at Nikonrumours the set of features where the 3000$ price was included was already reported has fake and maybe it shouldn't be considered.

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/10/24/the-name-will-be-nikon-df.aspx/

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (6 months ago)

What we're saying, which is that Nikonrumors reported that price, is absolutely true. The nature of rumours is that some are right and some are wrong, and that rumour sites will make statements and back-track and amend.

All we're saying is - we thought this rumour was interesting - regardless of whether it turns out to be true - and inviting a discussion on that basis. The truth of the rumour is irrelevant - it's about how interesting the concept is.

2 upvotes
Samuel Dilworth
By Samuel Dilworth (6 months ago)

You’re a patient man, Richard.

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

The nature of rumors and "leaks" is that the manufacturers protest but in fact, love them. It's free publicity and the number of comments serves as a gauge of the level of interest. Can't get any better than that.

But it does get better. Imagine if you were about to introduce a camera and wondering how much you could get for it as an introductory price. Obviously, you want to charge as much as you can but not more. These comments give a pretty good idea, and the information's free.

1 upvote
victorian squid
By victorian squid (6 months ago)

I've still got my FE2, and my wife her FM (my Grandmother killed my FE). More importantly, I've got *and use* my AI and AI-S lenses on my Canon gear! Those lenses rock - AI-S 28 f2.8, AI-S 50-135 f3.5, 50 f1.4 to name but 3 of my favorites.

I'd love to have a tiny little digital body with simple ergonomics that those lenses would feel at home on. I'm assuming this would be a non-AF system to keep the dimensions in check. I can totally deal with no AF as long as we've got something like the split-prism viewfinder they were made for! And as cinemascope says - aperture control on the lenses? Why not? Worked for me! While $3k is pushing something theoretically that simple, $1.5-2k is something I'd think I'd bite on.

But knowing typical corporate design by committee - they'll blow this one too.

2 upvotes
sixtiesphotographer
By sixtiesphotographer (6 months ago)

Having discrete controls for shutter speed and aperture was one of the reasons I bought an X-Pro1. I believe all frequently used controls should be discrete rather than being menu-item selections.

I think the Nikon F4 is a good example of this and would like to see a digital version of the F4 with its dials and switches.

I am very interested in this rumoured new camera and would likely buy it. Since it would appeal to a niche market, the price would be high because development costs would be spread across fewer buyers.

However, I do wish Nikon had been more forthcoming with the D600 issue; lack of communication has hurt them.

3 upvotes
SunnyFlorida
By SunnyFlorida (6 months ago)

Dear Nikon

Thank you for copying Fuji's copy of an old camera

Great Sensor

Way over priced

Regards

Everybody

1 upvote
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

Thank you for speaking on behalf of everybody about something you have never seen.

5 upvotes
John Motts
By John Motts (6 months ago)

We don't know anything about the price.
Nikon Rumors published a post that included a price of $3000, but they themselves admitted that those details had no truth.

0 upvotes
brownie314
By brownie314 (6 months ago)

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.

3 upvotes
b534202
By b534202 (6 months ago)

Yeah, they have the liberty to only post 'rumors' that they know is true, so they won't look bad later with some wrong info.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (6 months ago)

I wouldn't be too sure in this case. If Nikon is ready to go, they are passing up an opportunity to steal some thunder from Sony and Fuji at Photo Plus...instead of releasing silly videos that say nothing.

1 upvote
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (6 months ago)

I am as in favor of advancements in technology as the next person but this is just getting out of hand. I don't yearn for the days of old. I don't go to exhibitions because the images were made on a cellphone. And I certainly don't give a hoot whether the photographer used pure rainwater for the final bath or devised a new sharpening tool that takes voice commands. I just want images to change my perceptions and understandings. Let me put this another way: when is the last time you saw an announcement for an exhibition of paintings at MOMA or the Met that said the show will feature work done only with horse hair brushes?

Comment edited 33 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Devendra
By Devendra (6 months ago)

you put in a lot of effort in stating that this camera is not for you.

7 upvotes
Goodmeme
By Goodmeme (6 months ago)

For portraiture, I find that the subjects get nervous with a big ugly camera and whop-off lens. Most people like the look of these old cameras, and I find that they relax more.

It's also possible that they were designed when ergonomics was more of a selling point than ultimate technology speed or gadgetry.

4 upvotes
Vadimka
By Vadimka (6 months ago)

I agree with you, but you forgetting that this is not the art site. This website designed with only one goal in mind, and that is to sell product. This site originated as flamboyant Canikon lover site, but eventually, after it got bought out by corporation, they became closeted multisexual, that love everything for the sake of advertisement. Anything goes, as long as it generates traffic and sales. I'm not saying its bad, its just what they do. You want art, go elsewhere.

2 upvotes
Tom Goodman
By Tom Goodman (6 months ago)

I can afford two minutes, Devendra, including this response

1 upvote
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (6 months ago)

Well well, I still like my M3 and Summicron feel. If Nikon manage to produce a solid FF body that has the feel of yesteryear and still uses modern digital tech, and produces sota IQ, why not? The rumors point out to a smaller and thinner body (likely the reason for leaving video out - heat), many people will check it, especially if price is decent. Btw, the 3,000 price is from a discretited rumor.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Total comments: 554
2345