Previous page Next page

Studio Comparison (daylight)

Our latest test scene is designed to simulate both daylight and low-light shooting. Pressing the 'lighting' buttons at the top of the widget allows you to switch between the two. The daylight scene is shot with manually set white balance, but the camera is left in its Auto setting for the low-light tests.

Note: this page features our new interactive studio scene. Click here for instructions on the widget.

As you might expect, the Df can't compete with its peers in terms of resolution - 20, 24 and 36MP cameras are now the norm at this level, so the Df looks a bit out of place in that contest. However, the performance is certainly credible.

It's as the sensitivity rises that the Df begins to show its full capabilities. At ISO 1600 the Df does a really good job of retaining convincing low-contrast detail. Part of this is down to its JPEG engine (you can see the D610 does a similar job, but with a little more blurring as it tries to suppress its slightly higher noise level).

By ISO 12800 the Df is able to maintain much better detail than its rivals (note, in particular, the heavily smoothed JPEGs of the EOS 6D), though there are hints of chroma noise creeping into the shadow on the left-hand-side of the subject's face. Switching to Raw mode shows how much less noise the Df is producing - explaining why the JPEG engine has an easier time. Comparing the cameras at a common output size reduces the extent of the difference, with the EOS 6D producing a result that's closer to the Df's standard than either the D610 or Alpha 7 can match.

Previous page Next page
294
I own it
394
I want it
85
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 1625
12345
johncwingfield

After reading this review and all these comments, I'm very excited to purchase the Df as my first full frame camera. D4 sensor for half the price for great low light performance, manual dials which to me are a huge selling point as I've been waiting for a true digital/analog fusion, excellent AF performance, amazing lens versatility (I can finally bring my old Nikkor lenses out of retirement!). Not having Video functionality is a little troubling, although I rarely use the video function on my current camera anyway so not much of a loss there. This seems to be one of the only full frame cameras in my price range that doesn't have a "make or break" feature (or lack there-of) that turns me off from purchasing. Thanks Nikon, you've Successfully converted this Canon shooter with the creation of this beautiful camera!

0 upvotes
dog house riley

Right now i can't help to keep coming back to the design, of the DF, i had a brief chance to handle one! at first not a fan but as time has passed i keep thinking, maybe that wasn't as bad of a feel as i thought, I've got to say I'm still in the ball park to get one many features impress me and some don't?
I loved many years ago shooting my FE2 w/wo grip, and DF keeps taking me back.

0 upvotes
MoNi2

"The interesting thing about the Df's design is that while it has the Ai indexing tab around the lens throat, it can be folded out of the way, to allow older non-Ai lenses to mount without jamming. The professional F5 (1996-2004) was Nikon's last SLR to include it."

Well, I believe the D3X has a foldable Ai indexing tab. At least mine did.

0 upvotes
UnitedNations

For me only the pictures matter. So DF is a fine camera. D4 sensor at half the price.

0 upvotes
User8562468884

Just returned from a two week trip to Malaysia to try-out a new Df that I bought for myself for Christmas. Took over 6,000 shots of resorts, beaches, in-laws, general scenery and people shots at markets and the streets of Kuala Lumpur. My % of "keepers" rose to over 75% versus previous trips where I used a Nikon D7000 or Nikon D80, where the % of keepers was considerably lower. Also, for the first time in my photography experience, several people actually expressed curiosity about my camera and complimented me on the look of my Nikon Df... including several millennial types who probably never saw a film SLR. 'Nuff said... I love it.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
BobFoster

I think we are getting fed up with these hugely overpriced retro styled cameras.
I would never buy one.
Personally, I think Nikon need to bring a new D300s to the market. I would buy one of them.

2 upvotes
howellls

My D300S is still a new looking as the day I bought it. While full frame is tempting, I cant really say the D300S is not meeting my needs in any way. Love that camera. It was built for my hands. The DF has a cool factor. Would like to take one out for a weekend.

1 upvote
tabloid

Looks like a real mans camera.

0 upvotes
smphoto58

I was not aware of this body until today. This is an answer to my prayers. I HATE menus, always have. I have been using a D700 for the last 4 years and I STILL cannot get used to them. Nor do I like command dials either. I began using Nikon equipment in 1974 with the F2 and I still have it along with the MD2/MB1. I would bet I have put close to a mile of film through it since then. Since then I have added and F4, Nikkormat FT3 and Nikonos V. My D700 is used I manual about 99% of the time. For me it is nothing more than a digital version of my F2 or F4,

All of my Nikkors, from 16mm f/2.8 fisheye to 600mm f/4 are AI/AIS so this fits perfectly. Although Nikon does not offer interchangeable focusing screens, focusingscree.com does. I ordered a microprism screen from them before my D700 ever arrived.

Thank you Nikon for catering to your long time loyal followers!

Comment edited 56 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
WyoPhotog

Read up on this camera. It has menus.

0 upvotes
TFD

Nikon has never been able to practical interfaces on digital cameras too confusing too many menus. I sold my Nikon and bought a Sony, the interface is so elegant and straight forward I have never opened the manual

0 upvotes
Macesdownunder

Absolutely agree on all of the above. I have owned a bag of AIS glass and have just been waiting for this. Owned a D700 and now only use the DF. And Love the results. great colours and no bloated files for editing.

0 upvotes
powerglide

Had another look at the Df alongside my FM. It is no heavier but is bulkier. Price is over $3k here in Oz, so I'm looking at alternatives: a Fuji X-T1 as they have some nice FX primes out now, eg the 23/1.4 and the 35/1.4 - but they're not cheap either; also looked at the OMD-E10 again and I still don't like it in spite of all those good features (nifty lens cap, pop-up flash, pancake zoom). I just like the shutter-speed dial on top (Df too), and aperture and focus rings on the lens. Fuji have other lesser bodies also, and you CAN use a Metabones adapter to mount Nikin F lenses. I asked a pro shooting a wedding I was at, and he gave the X-T1 thumbs-up - said some colleagues had abandoned their Nik/Cans for Fuji. I'm looking for a devil's advocate.

0 upvotes
Mag200

The Nikon Df is a mix between old and new. It is for people who like to use cameras like 35mm slr film cameras. Cameras where you have to think about what the aperature, f/stop,and shutter speed must be set at. Now this wasnt that long ago (really it wasnt) but my senior year of high school I took a few photography classes. These classes were needed to fill my schedule and at first I didnt really know if i would like them. they were classes where we were using 35mm slr cameras and then we got to make a pinhole camera. I loved it. there were only 3 of us for photo 2 so technically the class shouldnt have gone but it did because 2 of us were seniors and everyone else dropped the last day before break first semester. We got to pick what we wanted to do and even check the school cameras out over break. So when my parents told me that I was getting a camera for graduation. I really wanted the Df but it was too expensive. I have the D5300. I hope to own a camera similar to the df.

0 upvotes
Lassoni

I'm confused what you're supposed to do with this camera. To use older lenses? But there are sites online (not just dxomark) that show the older lenses are MUCH softer than any of the newer generation of lenses. Less chroma, less distortion, less fringe..

If someone with collection of older lenses buys this camera so he doesn't have to "upgrade" his/her lenses, why not just buy a different camera and newer lenses? I'm curious.

1 upvote
Thermidor

Most of the Nikon lenses that comes in after 1977 aren't terribly soft, though definitely not tack sharp wide open. The Nikon Series E lenses were snubbed back in the 80s for being 'plastic', but their construction is far superior to any modern professional grade lens, and those were the cheap lenses. The mainstream Nikkors of the 70s and 80s were built like a tank and handles like a Porsche. Even in the age of digital autofocus, once you've tried for yourself the focusing experience on a legacy Nikon lens and compare it to today's lenses, you'll see why it's such a big deal. Plus everything you learn about manual focusing helps when you run into a situation where auto focusing is unreliable.

3 upvotes
powerglide

Exactly! - that's why I want to keep my primes and just use 'em on a digital body where I can focus and choose aperture and speed without having to deal with endless bs menus ... just frame the shot adjust exposure, check depth of focus - and shoot. That's all. Why Can't I get it in a package as small as my FM - or smaller?

0 upvotes
Dimitris Servis

Using a number of Nikkor Ais lenses, I can tell you they are not soft at all on modern Dslrs, on the contrary. If there is one thing that you need to control is flare.

That said, I use these lenses not because I am looking for the quantified image quality you refer to (resolving power, aberrations and so on) but for qualities that lie exactly in their flaws and their special signatures when used properly. I am sure that if you used a 50mm 1.2 Ais for close subjects at 1.2 you would appreciate it beyond its apparent halos and flaws.

0 upvotes
mickeybphoto

Overall I think owners of the Df, myself included, have an appreication for the camera the younger shooters wont appreciate. The Df has the ergonomics of older 35mm cameras such as the F3, FM, FE and even the F4s. But with the added convienience and quality of digital. Younger shooters were raised on LCD sceens, not that the Df is lacking, but with the added "traditional" dials it adds to the fun. The thing I really took a liking to right away was you can tell exactly what the settings are just by looking down at the top and not have to thumb through menu after menu. Exposure compensation is way easy to adjust and is overall a joy to work with. Not to mention alot of the older lenses can be used. Nikon has really out done themselves on the design, with exception of the strap lugs. I wish they were a little further back, and a but more grip. Perhaps on the Df2, the can add a second SD card slot and make the grip a little beffier. Overall though the Df is a joy to own and shoot.

3 upvotes
reanim888

I think we are getting fed up with these hugely overpriced retro styled cameras.
I would never buy one.
Personally, I think Nikon need to bring a new D300s to the market. I would buy one of them.

5 upvotes
smphoto58

I would say speak for yourself when it comes to "getting fed up......". Just because you would never buy one does not mean a lot of us WOULD, myself included. If you are happy with an amateur camera like the D300, whatever floats your boat.

I have waited for a camera like this for a long time, I use my D700 as nothing more than a digital version of my F2 so this fits in perfectly.

2 upvotes
Roy LaFaver

To keep this thing going, I'm another Df owner that hopes it lasts forever. It is absolutely my favorite Nikon ever, digital or film, even the beloved FM2n. I have built up a pretty nice set of AI and AI-S lenses. And for seasoning I have a Voigtlander 40mm Ultron II which is fantastic. I still have a few AF lenses, and I use them sometimes. But if I want to do "enjoyment", it has to be one of my MF lenses. I got rid of my longest held lens, a 70-200mm f2.8G, and I replaced it with MF lenses. I have a 200mm f4 that came from an estate sale. It had never been used. The lubricant was so dry I had to send it to Nikon to be cleaned and re-lubed. I now have what is essentially a new 200mm f4 that was built in 1979, and it is probably one of the highest quality lenses on the planet right now. It fits the Df so well and works so well, it is pure pleasure to use.

The Df made this kind of thing possible and even desirable. You take your time, and you just enjoy every moment with it.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
6 upvotes
Jasko014

My old 50/1.2 AIS lens has got new life with that camera. Perfect combination. I did love Nikon F3 and Df for me is a great camera and perfect companion for my Nikon D3.

2 upvotes
David Click Click

Nikon user for 30plus years digital since D100. Very pleased with my Df. I have been using a D700 and love the image quality... but bought a D800 and can say it is the first Nikon I have failed to love it was the first that I could not get good images straight out of the box!.
Logic said that the Df should be good as it uses the D4 sensor etc. and it is. I also like the solid feel, the compact size and lighter weight...... even well balanced with a medium zoom fitted. But it is image quality that really matters and as to be expected from the D4 sensor this is first rate. Most of us tend to develop a set up for controls and settings which we basically stick to so a change to the physical control dials/wheels is not a problem and I can, and do, switch between my D700 and Df easily. So here is one very pleased Df user and one D800 for sale! I have subscribed to the view for awhile that chasing pixels is not important as getting pixels that perform, the Df provides the optimum

9 upvotes
Robert A F

A Most Excellent Camera. THE perfect FX camera for my landscapes. Ergonomically complete. No plastic mold feel, wishing it felt just a little bit better. The best of all worlds---small and tough and great sensor. Nikon, please don't stop developing this class of camera.

4 upvotes
dhtima

exelent camera and good review guys, but why you always changing studio scene - maiking impossible to compare with older cameras?
your scene is only capable to compare with modern cameras only! *cry*

2 upvotes
Mike Laughlin

It's not about a 'retro look" for me ... it's what it can do for me. It is simply amazing. -- The low-light capability, the full-manual controls, and so
compact compared to the bloated, plastic hulks that are bigger than the 6x6 and 6x7 cameras of yore.

If something were to happen to mine, I would immediately buy another Df black body for fear Nikon might decide to make it a short-run product.

3 upvotes
Ajaykdelhi

Got a Df today and shot few pictures, results are amazing particularly in low light...

3 upvotes
chatnoir

I have the Df since December 24 and I'm happy with it, has its magic

https://www.flickr.com/photos/migatonegro/11529585884/

3 upvotes
powerglide

Thank you, David. I played with a Df in a store but they knew squat about it, and got edgy, so I walked. Had my AISs to try, but he didn't understand what I wanted to do. I like to use primes wide open in lots of situations, so aperture priority is nice. Can I use the Df like this with old AIS primes? BTW, I did notice how nice the VF was for focusing (I tried it in a dark corner of the store).

Gone off the OMD-E M10. Sony A7 looks like the sole alternative as I can buy an adapter for my Nikkors, and its full-frame also. Don't know of any other non-Nikon that will do that. Kind of sorry I sold my 85, but it always was a bit short and a bit soft. When I get the body nailed, I might look for a 105 - how does yours shoot on the Df? I looked at a D610, but didn't like it much.

2 upvotes
OldOlympusfan

Hi powerglide,

OMD EM10 is tempting to me, a good camera I am sure - an aesthetic triumph. So why have you gone off the EM10? (They should should call it OMD10 and be done with it!)

It's a lot more cost than the old 35mm OM10 that I had in 1981 and mentioned in my other post. Similarly, this Nikon Df is hugely more expensive than the old FM that you have - this Df looks so much like the FM, FE and FG I think from circa 1980. I have just been looking on this site:
http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/htmls/models/htmls/slrmain5979.htm
and saw the little entry level EM - how cute was that? The equivalent of the OM10. What amazing value those were really at the time.

I have great nostalgia for those old 35mm cameras, though using film is getting more and more tricky, unless you have your own established darkroom set up.

I must say though, that even the entry level DSLRs have so many options that there is plenty for a geek like me to enjoy so one can't complain.

0 upvotes
davidbarbour

2nd post>…have used the Df's for 5 months>variety of assignments…great camera, sold all my zooms and the 28/50/105mm AIS lens work beautifully on the camera…the camera is far quieter, manual focus with 2.8 lenses, one can focus on ground glass….stunning in low light at 1250….changing ISO and shutter speed without going into the menu is so quick and efficient…by far the best digital camera I have owned…the only ugly thing about this camera is Nikon's picture of it….looks big>it isn't….I own 2…thrilled with these cameras….solid, exceptional body

Comment edited 44 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
tabloid

I think the design and looks of the DF makes it a mans camera…not like the poofy/bling/girly looking stuff around today.

Again…great looking camera.

3 upvotes
Matiss from Latvia

A real man is not worried about the camera design, but simply does what has to do - using camera for photography :) ;)

4 upvotes
Teila Day

What in the heck is a "man's" camera? All cameras are simply cameras that either work for your professional or personal needs or it doesn't. Whether it has rainbows and pink giraffes stamped all over it is of no consequence to usability and image quality.

Comment edited 30 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
powerglide

Advice, please. I will replace my FM (28, 35, 50, and 200. What's making me go digital is the demise of Kodachrome.

Do I toss the lot and get an Olympus OM-D E M10 with the pancake zoom and self-closing lens cap (and no bigger than an old OM-1, which is my second favourite camera after my FM). (I've owned and used a few over the years, starting with a box Brownie, then a Kodak folder, a Leica IIIG, other rangefinders, SRT-101, X7, then came a Nikon F with photomic head, then a Nikkormat FTb, and lastly the wonderful FM, to which I have been faithful for 30 years!).

Best is Nikkor f2/35 that delivers every time on the edge, e.g., in a European cathedral in winter when light is low and Kelvin-shifted. The FM body is good because you can shoot for depth of field and focus, change the speed for available light, then frame, all without looking at the camera controls. Seems both the Df and OM-D can do this. It's the compact size of the OM-D with lens retraced that gives it an edge.

1 upvote
OldOlympusfan

Dear powerglide,

I really liked your post.

If you have spare money, don't get rid of that wonderful Nikon FM. Once lost, never regained.

On another article here, I saw a picture of the Olympus OM-10 and I thought, "Ahhh, that is so gorgeous." I had one in 1981 when I was 15 and wish I had never sold it. I wanted an OM-2N but it was too much to buy with an 80-210 zoom lens, so I went for the OM-10. (Also, I went to buy a new OM-2N one day in Leicester UK and Jessops' huge shop didn't have it in stock - I came home so disappointed. I bought the OM-10 the following week.)

11 years later, I spent about £450 on an OM-4Ti with its fab multi-spot metering and annoying battery drain - but I sill miss the OM-10, because at £89.95 it was fabulous value and with another £15 you could add Manual mode.

I ended up with a couple of nice used OM-2Ns and some lovely Zuiko lenses. I would hate to get rid of them esp my 35 f/2, 85 f/2 and the tiny and gorgeous 16/3.5 fisheye and 21/3.5 superwide.

0 upvotes
powerglide

Oh, I'm keeping the FM and the primes. The digi will be extra, and that's why I don't mind if it's not Nikon. Nikon stuff is good, and I really appreciate their backwards-compatability

0 upvotes
Paul P K

Since I have the DF ( April this year) I've hardly touched the D and D800 despite their superior AF, fps (D3) and pixels (D800).

Love the size, weight, image quality and high ISO. Great for discreet shooting, and ideally balanced with my old 1.4/50mm Ais, 2/28mm Ais and pre AI 1.8/85mm

Dials not a problem (just like shooting with my old F2AS and FE), nor is the according to the naysayers 'inferior' AF (works without a problem with all my AF D and AFS lenses), still can shoot catwalk under low light conditions with it

Not a camera for the general public nor for the techies, but if judged on its own merits IMO quite a little gem

3 upvotes
Ajaykdelhi

I wonder why Nikon has overpriced Df. It should have ideally been in the pricing range of D610

1 upvote
Onyxtiger

The Df is definitely NOT ugly. I started shooting Nikon back in 1967 with a Nikon F....I still have it, along with a Nikkormat EL, an F2S and a myriad of classic Nikon lenses. The Df is perfect for me. I can use all my lenses, plus the newer digital lenses that I have also purchased for my first digital Nikon.

Who the heck needs video on a DSLR?

3 upvotes
Marty CL

The Df reminds me of a large Nikon FM.

1 upvote
johnbatten

isn't it odd that trolls don't give their real names...

3 upvotes
johnbatten

I find I'm using my Df for 90% of my professional work - the 800 gathers dust. I can't wait for the Df2, which should have a second SDC slot for backup...

Well done Nikon!

4 upvotes
Ian Mace

Me too....Love it...

3 upvotes
NonChillFiltered

A camera for .... photography??
that looks like .... a camera??

Absolutely beautiful concept and camera in the world of products designed for manufacturability and main stream thoughtlessness, coming from the company known for catering to people who know. Ordering with 85mm 1.4D.

5 upvotes
40daystogo

Saw it in the store. Has to be one of ugliest, most ungainly cameras I've seen in several decades of being into photography. I owned the original Nikon FE, FE2, FM and FM2's, which were really attractive cameras in their day, and I still keep my old FE2 as a keepsake, but I have to say this new digital Df looks like a Frankenstein. It's just ugly. The thing is, I really like the design of Nikon's other DSLR's, and I've owned a few Nikon DSLRs over the last few years - but this Df looks like it's made of Lego bricks. I'm curious how many of these Nikon have sold, and whether the people who buy them value the appearance of their cameras?

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
1 upvote
NikonF3T

As of last month, Df is still in short supply in Japan. While I still have not had a chance to try it on my hand, the bulkier appearance (taller, thicker, and shorter) than FM/FE series probably will fit me just fine as I'm used to use F3+MD4 and F4S.

0 upvotes
rpichlerphoto

I have a Df arriving for test tomorrow since I'm looking for a smaller camera than the D3 I currently use but don't want to jump ship nor need the D800 huge RAW files. I loved how the camera felt in my hands at the reveal here in Croatia back in November and now I look forward shooting a wedding with it to see how it performs in the real situations.

Personally, I love the retro appearance (will opt for a full black one, dough) and the possibility of having the D4 sensor for half the price is just great.

Will post about it next week after I finish testing it.

2 upvotes
wvargas95

Retro look, what retro look? I have been using Nikon cameras for 45 years and I have never seen a Nikon like this, it looks weird and boxy. You want to make a retro Nikon then stick to the Nikon F or F3 body style, these cameras fit in your hand like a globe. The Df failed in that category.

1 upvote
Stanchung

I think I've mastered the dails already. Don't like that the whole batt cover plate can come out.

so much less to worry about. just decide on 3 things and compose.

I don't it's for everyone, only those who think they're special. hahahahahahaha

1 upvote
dinoSnake

I still find it laughably ironic on how many reviewers complain about the locked exposure compensation dial...when it was Nikon's standard for over 40 years. And just one of the reasons why I DIDN'T buy a Nikon film SLR.

When the locked exposure dial was Nikon's standard, everyone thought it was "normal"; now that Nikon no longer uses the lock, everything thinks that is "normal" - in other words, everyone accepts what is most commonly handed to them [by Nikon] and learn to frown on the alternative.

Strange world.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW

I believe the dial is only locked in “A”. I’ll check to confirm. But this point was raised and explained months ago.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

I checked, and it's only the 1/3 setting that locks on the exposure dial.

So basically: Not a locking exposure dial.

1 upvote
NikonF3T

I noticed the exposure compensation dial can be cumbersome to use, as it's integrated into ISO dial as well. Don't know how FM / FE series were set up, but the F3 was set up exactly that way. And I wasn't a big fan of this (alleged) efficient design.

0 upvotes
Gionni Dorelli

I saw this camera in real life a few days ago. The touch and fell and its look reminded me of a Chinese knock off of a Rolex watch you can buy in Canal Street.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW

Did you shoot with the Df? Does the image quality lack? Does it not function well?

Then magnesium by volume is lighter than brass.

I think there's a certain irony that some have complained that the Df looks clunky, an aesthetic problem real, and fake, Rolex watches oft times have.

2 upvotes
Gionni Dorelli

I have no doubt the image quality is outstanding, yet the main reason someone should buy this camera over a D4 is the look, touch and feel. Nikon failed to provide exactly on those 3 points.
The camera is a far cry from the original FM2 which it is inspired from. Also it is too big for no reason.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

Gionni:

The Df is slightly better at high ISO lowlight shooting than the D4, and the Df can be set to shoot more quietly than the D4, so those are reasons to use the Df instead of the D4.

The Df is of course also lighter and less expensive than the D4, so those are two other reasons to buy it instead of the D4.

Making things smaller and just as functional costs monies. Note that the Leica M240 is thicker than the Leica M6.

1 upvote
MChaov

I love this camera! It is the best I've had by far. The dials are a bit tricky at first but give a lot more satisfaction when shooting.

It is a camera for people who like to tinker and adjust and play while shooting the perfect shot - not guys who take 5000 shots and then choose 2 out of them.

This is not a professional studio camera, it can be used as such but you can't adjust it as fast real-time as 5D, D3x or D4.

I'd recommend it to anyone who loves to take photos. Just add to it a nice 24-70, f/2 and you are good to go!

2 upvotes
Fons Claessens

The only thing that's "bad" on this faboulous camera is: autofocus in low light.

Comment edited 20 seconds after posting
1 upvote
RichRMA

Nikon gave people who clamoured for it a retro camera. It's likely they won't do this again thanks to the reception it's gotten.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

Why? Is the Df not selling?

Could it be a better version of many dial control, like the Fuji XT1 or Olympus EM1? Yes?

0 upvotes
Sad Joe

PLUS: D4 sensor inside a compact D600 / retro body. CONS: EVERYTHING else !

0 upvotes
Wim Robberechts

For my kind of work (aerial photography) I need 3 camera bodies. I have a D3, D3x and a D4. Since I have the Df I never leave home without. It's by far the best camera I ever had. The 50mm 1.8 lens is a perfect match as well.

2 upvotes
davidbarbour

whenever I read these comments, it seems 99% of the people have never used the Df….I now own two, they are lighter, far quieter, smaller than the D700. I sold my zooms and the best feature is that with fast AIS lenses, I can easily focus on the ground glass…I never use Auto Focus, far faster to focus on the ground glass. I hardly look at my menu and the overall body construction is superb…I have shot for 42 years and this is an exceptional camera for travel, coverage of events, weddings…the high ISO quality is exceptional…use the camera and you will love it...

11 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

Thank you for making the point about the easy of manual focusing.

2 upvotes
MChaov

EXACTLY!!! I almost didn't buy it after all the negativity around the web.

The first shot is when I decided I don't want to use another one :)

1 upvote
i9imbig

Please advice, which one is better DF or D800e??? I am just occasionally using camera to shoot

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

i9imbig:

It matters what you're trying to shoot and the lenses you plan on using.

It also matters if the best dynamic range (also dependent on the lens) is really important to you.

0 upvotes
Lawrence33

Will be looking hard at the Df
Oh! lord, did you really love the amateur, more than the photo-artist, you made so many of them ? And lord the 'Egos' please lighten them up.
It was much more fun, when you could pick from the two models that everyone made 'back in the days'. Who needs 64 models vs. 47 models?
Does it make the shutter pusher any better. Are we just paying for R&D ?
Yes I use some really old lenses from Nikon, I've built a mount for a Leica Long Focus, to work with a cheaper Nikon motor drives. It still works, even today.
Digital is nice for those who have to see if the camera really worked and the capture is there. While the world moves on.
My cameras' have taken me to many countries. And I've seen many different peoples through Nikon lenses and will some more.

0 upvotes
armandino

I do not want to be a troller or such. Maybe I do not understand Nikon philosophy because I do not own one. However, as much as I admire Nikon effort in producing exceptional cameras, I do not find myself a single all rounded camera to fully satisfy me for all conditions. Nikon made a tonne of bodies lately but i do not see a single do it all camera, that I would be ready to grab for all occasions. I.e, the performance body is the D4, but I would not take it with me traveling or to a party, just too heavy and intrusive for some situations. Also the resolution is at its minimum these days (landscape?). D800 is too much resolution and a tad too slow for all condition gear. The D610 sounds promising, but the AF is not quite up there. Really the D700 was THE camera of choice (although a bit low in resolution). Really I would not know what to pick right now for an all condition camera from Nikon. If somebody is happy with a crop sensor I guess the D7100 is excellent, but a no go for me.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
armandino

to me this is just another wonderful tool that Nikon made in its scattered minded roadmap

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW

amandino--

There's no such thing as the perfect all round camera, and Nikon wouldn't sell it anyhow even if they knew to make one. This was also true back in the film era.

Drop the idea that 16 MP is limited resolution--it's basically a delusion, and more mega pixels can easily degrade image quality.

The D7100 is fine camera body, and APSC sensors are excellent, this one included, but there's the buffering problem with that particular body.

2 upvotes
armandino

I think 18-25 mp is a nice range for full frame MP count. 16 is just a tad low. I guess it still depends on the person's use, but for sport photography or where cropping is frequent it does make a difference for sure. Honestly the best all rounded camera on the market right now is the 5DMKIII. It would be nice if it had more dynamic range, but it does get away with what it has most of the times. I find that each Canon camera has a well defined marketing and purpose domain with the 5D being the happy medium. Nikon distribution is more chaotic to my taste, at times some cameras even cannibalize products within Nikon lineup (i.e. D800 vs D3x). Or jumping from the low MP count of D700 philosophy to the extreme opposite of the D800. Not to mention the Df, a no land camera. Do not get me wrong, I think they are all very fine cameras, potentially better then the Canon counterparts, yet the whole picture is not very organic. Some choices seem impulsive and not so well though out.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
armandino

Ah, one more thing. Sure there cannot be a camera that is best at everything, however you can have a camera that excels at everything, I am not sure why Nikon would not want do make it, as it has shown will to cannibalize its own products for the sake of gaining market share. That would have been the D800 with a D600 sensor and a buffer and speed of the 5D MKIII.
Which is basically a 5DMKIII with improved sensor performance.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

The 5D III is a nice camera. But not great at high ISOs and as you say DR lacks a bit. So those are reasons for fewer megapixels in say the 6D or the Nikon D4.

If you know what you're doing, much cropping isn't really necessary. And most people simply don't print at 20 by 30 inches.

2 upvotes
armandino

Again for all rounded cropping is important. When you are shooting sports it is an very important feature. Have you actually used the 5D? ISO is really good, I am not sure why you insist that is not so much. Let me give you and example of how flexible this body is. I was in Brazil for 2 months I shot from fashion swimsuit to up to my neck deep in a lagoon shooting kite surfers, raw 1080 video, street photography. I cannot think of another camera that could have handled all of that to the same extent. Nikon D4 would have not been an option for some of these situations, like street photography, or no cropping power for kite surfing. I also shot surfing, but I only had a 300+1.4x cropping was important too, and weight was at time too.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

armandino,

I think you're missing my point:

The 5D III is good at higher ISOs, but not great like the Df. (Here the Canon 6D is also better at high ISOs than the 5D III.)

Right, that kite surfing example would be a good place to use cropping, or an APSC sensored DSLR body. Then of course the D800 allows for more cropping than the 5D III, but for either the D800 or 5D III dynamic range limits come into play.

If you're shooting fashion, yes big prints come into play, but that's just not real common.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
WalterLee

I have the camera for the past 2 weeks and it is exactly what I am looking for in a camera. I have a D800 and traded in my D3 for the Df.
I will give top marks for to the Df for its image quality, ease of use, and simply gorgeous design.
When fitted with the Nikon 50mm 1.4D, the combi works and looks great. Being able to use the aperture ring again is both nostalgic and exciting.
Top marks also for the retro and yet fully functional design. I agree that Df feels even better with primes.

4 upvotes
Royalpig180

You know that you can use the aperture ring of AF and manual focus lenses on other Nikon's right? I'm not entirely which, but at least on the D7100, it's an option in the menu under the command dial settings, so the Df is not unique in this respect. The major advantage of the Df as far as lens compatability is the retractable AI tab.

0 upvotes
jedy

Very disappointed when this was released. Thanks to the rumours, there was me thinking it was going to be a full frame mirrorless camera and instead we end up with another bulky dslr. I would love a smaller camera with a retro (read simpler) layout that doesn't require trawling through menus to setup for a shot. Whilst the layout is 'retro', this camera is just a dslr without video and wifi yet stupidly priced. If only Fujifilm made a full frame camera!

0 upvotes
ArchAndoz

its smaller than other ff dslrs but isnt that small especially since i had the omd em 5 and such mirrorless cameras the sizes are not comparable and that is a definite minus for the df however as for the layout i think i can say you are sort of wrong i have been using the df for about 2-3 months now and i never and i mean NEVER use the liveview menus or layout especially because there is a button or dial for everything i just wished it had focus peaking though the viewfinder is nice big and bright ive been spoiled with my partners red line focus peaking thing on the fuji .........

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

jedy--

The menus simply aren't a problem with this camera.

Full frame and then a smaller mirrorless body would mean entirely new lenses. (Like the Sony A7/R).

Wifi is not exactly universal, I believe there are different standards around the world, so it's best to leave it out. Anyhow would add space.

Video takes more power so the bigger battery would add space and weight.

Thru ISO 6400 both the Sony A7 and the Leica M240 are excellent full framed mirrorless systems. (The A7 is a bit too loud, and there still aren't enough lenses, but that will change in years to come.)

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW

That’s what the used departments of B+H or Adorama, etc are for.

Or Ebay.

And I think more manufacturers should copy the idea of big sensors with fewer pixels in smaller, lighter, less expensive bodies the way that Nikon did with the Df and to a lesser extent Canon did with the 6D. (And no I’ve not forgotten the Sony A7.)

1 upvote
armandino

I think 6D is as good if not better. Smaller, better AF, video, ergonomics and $1,000 less. Df only better if you need better iso above 12,000. Nothing else really.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

6D is nice, but not quite the high ISO performance of the Df.

Also of course, the neither the Df or 6D sell for less than $1000, and that's not going to happen for a while.

Then video in the Df would mean a bigger battery. And there are all sorts of problems with video on DSLRs, some will get fixed, but not this year.

0 upvotes
armandino

6D is better or equal in pretty much all aspects. No many can justify to spend $1,000 more for a lesser camera just for the look and superior ISO performance for 25,600 and upward. HowaboutRaw, you seem obsessed by extremely high ISO performance, most of us are not.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

arm:

I admit that high ISOs are important to me. And the 6D sure is good.

But there are Canon sensor DR problems, here Zeiss can help, but then Zeiss helps Nikon too.

I kind of agree that the Df should have been something like a D800 but with fewer mega pixels. (But the knobs don't bother me.)

Also what was the price of the 6D when if first released? It's been out for more than a year, so predictably its price has gone down. Same will happen with the Df in 18 months.

0 upvotes
Smokymtnhiker

Howabout...you seem to be obsessed with ultra-high ISO performance. What are you shooting? Bunnies by moonlight? :)

0 upvotes
Traingineer

I think Nikon should of just made this a film camera than turn one of their DSLRs into a "retro" film camera.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

That’s what the used departments of B+H or Adorama, etc are for.

Or Ebay.

And I think more manufacturers should copy the idea of big sensors with fewer pixels in smaller, lighter, less expensive bodies the way that Nikon did with the Df and to a lesser extent Canon did with the 6D. (And no I’ve not forgotten the Sony A7.)

1 upvote
joe Campo d2x

Full Frame sensor in a small body, for half the price of a D4, same low noise at hi ISO as D4, love the camera, even the battery is great ….. there are some not so spectacular reviews but Thom has it right, read what he has to say ……. Berger Brothers beat all prices, and I got a black one with retro lens. ….. love it , can't wait for spring.

4 upvotes
saradindubose

Will all my Nikon manual FM2 lens - 23mm 35 70 and 70 210mm work with DF?

2 upvotes
Victor Arroyo Mexico

Yes, of course. Even older Nikkors or equivalents from other brands (Sigma, Tokina, Vivitar, Tamron, etc.). This is great!, I have a lot of old optics that I was next to bid, but with this camera, I am happy to be able to use them again.

1 upvote
Ian Mace

I'm using a bag full of both AFS and AIS glass- love it!

5 upvotes
Total comments: 1625
12345