PIX 2015
Previous page Next page

Nikon Df Review

December 2013 | By Richard Butler and Barney Britton


Review based on a production Nikon Df

The Nikon Df is, at first appearance, the camera that many people have been asking for, for years - a classically styled DSLR with traditional external controls. But, for all Nikon's talk of a return to 'Pure Photography,' an awful lot of what's under the Df's confidently retro skin is pretty familiar. The Df is built around the 16MP full frame sensor from the company's flagship D4 with the processor and AF system borrowed from the comparatively affordable D610.

The camera's appearance is inspired by a much earlier generation of film cameras. In fact, from the front the Df looks like an oversized Nikon FM (and not dissimilar to Canon's F1N). And, as well as the styling and dedicated external controls, the Df's other nod to the company's history is the inclusion of a retractable meter coupling tab, allowing the use of pre-1977 non-AI lenses.

For those of us raised on film SLRs the effect is rather intriguing. We understand that the Df has been at least four years in the making, and the glee of its creators is almost palpable in the many specific design cues obviously taken from earlier SLRs including the FM/2 and the long-lived professional-targeted Nikon F3.

Nikon Df key features

  • 16 megapixel full-frame CMOS sensor (same as D4)
  • ISO 100-25,600 (expandable to ISO 50 - 204,800 equiv)
  • Maximum 5.5 fps continuous shooting
  • 39-point AF system with 9 cross-type AF points (same as D610)
  • 3.2-inch, 921k-dot LCD screen
  • Physical shutter speed, ISO and exposure compensation dials
  • Compatible with virtually all Nikon F-mount lenses (including pre-Ai standard)
  • Single SD card slot
  • EN-EL14a battery (quoted endurance of ~1400 exposures)

According to Nikon, the 'F' in Df stands for 'fusion' - specifically, fusion of the old and the new. We know all about the old - the 'retro' styling - which leaves us with the 'D'. This of course stands for 'Digital'. The Nikon Df boasts a full-frame sensor, 39-point AF system and a maximum shooting rate of 5.5 fps. The LCD on the rear of the camera is a 3.2", 921k-dot display and, despite its 'fully manual' pretensions, the Df boasts front and rear electronic control dials alongside the dedicated physical dials on the top-plate. It's a thoroughly modern DSLR for the most part, but with one major difference.

What, no video?

That major difference is video - the Df cannot shoot it (making it one of only two current DSLRs which don't - the other being the Sigma SD1 Merrill). In conversation with Nikon engineers, we were told that video was never on the table as an option for the Df, apparently as much a philosophical point as anything else. This is a serious camera for serious people which is to be used for 'pure photography', not videos (oddly though, the Df still boasts a full complement of retouch options including the decidedly lightweight fisheye and miniature effects).

While it's true that many potential Df owners might not care about video, if you can add a function, why not do so? Since it's based around a video-capable sensor and shares its image processor with a camera that can shoot video, it's reasonable to assume it could be added via firmware, but the question is probably academic, since the Df has no built-in microphone nor a jack for adding one. Equally, the Df's relatively low-capacity EN-EL14a battery wouldn't last terribly long, even if such a feature were enabled.

Df - a D4 in F3 clothing?

If you look beyond the Df's outward appearance, another aspect of its appeal is the relatively inexpensive access it gives to the image sensor used in the company's flagship DSLR, the D4. And while that's true, the omission of video and high-speed frame rates mean you don't get to take full advantage of its capabilities. Even without those aspects, the well-respected low-light capabilities of the D4's sensor should lend some appeal to the Df.

Viewfinder

The Df's optical viewfinder is very large - the same size as the D800. The magnification is 0.70x and, naturally, coverage is 100%. We've also shown the viewfinder of the film-era F3 here for reference. As you can see, the F3 offered an impressively large finder, and even the high eye-point viewfinder that glasses wearers tended to prefer was still larger than the Df's. When a DX lens is attached to the Df, the viewfinder shows frame-lines indicating the DX image area.

One real shame (although perhaps not a surprise) is the fact that the Df's focusing screen is fixed. We had hoped for an accessory split-prism focusing screen for manual focus, but it's likely that the additional cost and incompatibility with modern pattern metering modes ruled that out at the design stage. Instead the Df has Nikon's standard 'rangefinder' display in the viewfinder, which uses the autofocus sensor to indicate when it thinks the lens is correctly focused.

Kit options and pricing

The Nikon Df comes in two color options - silver and all-black, and in the USA, both will be available for $2749 body only. Nikon has created a special edition of its AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G to match the 'retro' look and feel of the Df (optically it's identical to the standard version) and this is available separately for $279, or bundled with the Df for $2999.95.

The Df is being sold with a cosmetically reworked version of the AF-S Nikkor 50mm F1.8G, with some 'classic' (but entirely cosmetic) design accents to match the look of the new camera.

In the UK, the Df is available only as a kit with the 50mm lens, at a suggested price of £2749.99 - only £50 less than the recommended price of the 36MP D800 and revamped 50mm F1.8. Unlike the US figure, this includes 20% VAT, but that still works out as around the equivalent of $3660, even if you take this into account. That said, prices change at different rates in different markets so, once the initial rush of customers has subsided, the prices might begin to look less unreasonable.

If you're new to digital photography you may wish to read the Digital Photography Glossary before diving into this article (it may help you understand some of the terms used).

Conclusion / Recommendation / Ratings are based on the opinion of the reviewer, you should read the ENTIRE review before coming to your own conclusions.

We recommend to make the most of this review you should be able to see the difference (at least) between X, Y, and Z and ideally A, B, and C.

This article is Copyright 1998 - 2015 and may NOT in part or in whole be reproduced in any electronic or printed medium without prior permission from the author.

Previous page Next page
298
I own it
397
I want it
90
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 1627
5678
halai

This is for Nikon. So, you expect us to buy this camera and still carry around our camcorder for videos. We know you market this camera as a "Pure Photography" camera, but common, we can still use a camera that has a video function as "Pure Photography", and then switch that button for "Pure Videography" too. Really dumb marketing Nikon.

8 upvotes
Horshack

Well on the bright side if Nikon makes too many Df's they can always tear them down and use the parts to build D610's instead.

Joking aside, I think the basic concept and aesthetic behind the Df was a good one but Nikon just cut too many corners in terms of features and specifications in their quest to produce a high-margin product. Glaring omissions like interchangeable focus screens, aperture control in Live View, dual SD slots, higher-quality fit and finish, the clustered 39-AF point system from the D610, etc... all while charging $1400 more than what refurbished D600's are selling for is just too much a value stretch for this late stage of the camera industry. The market has matured to the point where companies must lower their prices and/or increase the value they provide if they are to rise above the noise and have a successful product. Companies like Pentax, Sony, and Olympus seem to understand this. Nikon went in the opposite direction with the Df.

9 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

Sure looks like the screen can be changed by Nikon with the right tools, so like the D700.

Nikon is not going to sell a body with the D4's sensor for less than the D610 retails for, while the D4 is still selling new, this is really obvious.

This body has extraordinary fit and finish--clearly you're going by something you read and have not handled the body.

Some how I'll bet this isn't hugely high profit margin for Nikon.

1 upvote
Horshack

I used the Df for about two weeks before handing it off to my friend who was the buyer. I posted some of my experience/opinions here:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52648585

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

Horschack:

That you've shot with it and liked it well enough doesn't then mean that when you say Nikon should only charge $1300 for it you'll be treated seriously.

See the problem? You're asking Nikon to charge the price of a D7100 for a full framed body with the sensor from the D4? It's just not going to happen for at least 5 years.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Horshack

I think if Nikon would've spec'd the Df closer to a D800 then the $2,750 introduction price would have been better received. As the body stands now I think $2,249 is a reasonable price.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

Hoshack:

In many ways the specs of the Df are better than the D800. And in fact it's that lowlight high ISO capacity that really draws a lot of attention to the Df.

2700 minus 1400 does NOT equal 2250; you're off by a big percentage and that's a problem.

0 upvotes
sgoldswo

All I'm going to say is that this is a great camera that leaves a smile on your face every time you shoot with it. People can have any opinions they like, but the pattern I've noticed is that owners think it's great, non-owners perceive weaknesses.

The camera feels great in hand (if anything it's light for a DSLR) and, in my opinion, the controls are well thought out for personal use. It's simply incorrect to say low light AF is poor - my model focused in virtually complete darkness!

The camera is relatively light and it's a body to mount primes on. The 16mp sensor isn't a champ at Dynamic range at base ISO (although it is above base ISO) but it's got better noise performance than just about any other camera.

Another nice point is that people react well to this camera. They look, they smile, they ask you about it. It's a very positive experience. Yes it lacks resolution, but in practice its a non issue.

All in all, I think Nikon have a very hot camera on their hands here.

4 upvotes
locke_fc

It certainly didn't leave a smile on the reviewer's face.

10 upvotes
sgoldswo

Im not sure I care - I like it and this is about the only negative review I've read of the camera...

5 upvotes
locke_fc

I wouldn't say it's negative.
I cannot speak from experience, but what I get from the review is that the Df is slightly underwhelming on too many fronts, considering the big price tag.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
sgoldswo

Yeah, that's what I find crazy - a high price, maybe so. Underwhelming? It's like they've tested a different camera...

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

locke_fc:

This is an overwhelming camera, and yes I've used the D4, D3s and D700.

1 upvote
Pik2004

fugly camera.

7 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

What does "fugly" have to do with function or performance or end image quality?

Do you want the body to complement your neck tie, or do you want to shoot photos well?

1 upvote
quiquae

@HowaboutRAW

I don't agree with Pik2004, but the Df's appearance is definitely fair game for criticism, considering that Nikon adopted a radically different external design specifically to appeal to nostalgic users. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

quiquae:

That's fine if you don't like the aesthetic of the body, but that has nothing to do with its function and image quality.

And not buying it because it doesn't go with your tie, but still performs every function you need/want seems odd and not a position someone who's serious about taking photos with digital cameras would take.

0 upvotes
quiquae

Would you buy the Df even if it were painted pink with green polka dots and yellow stripes, with Barney the Purple Dinosaur logos all over the place?

I doubt many people would.

You may think it's frivolous, but appearance matters. Whether Df meets your aesthetic standards or not is a different matter.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

quiquae:

You've described nothing aesthetically that black gaffer's tape can't fix. Also all that colour would be good camouflage, making people think it's a toy.

Though yes, I'd expect a discount for the polka dotted version.

0 upvotes
Dimit

This ''manual controls festival'' won't sell.Period.Maybe for 1200 less?
Cameras in modern era are ELECTRONICS.lens less..yet,aesthetics have changed,no matter what SOME people think.
Nikon step forward,others do..
Fair review..

10 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

$1200 less aint going to happen while the D4 is selling new, get it?

0 upvotes
sgoldswo

Seems to be selling by the bucketload, supply warnings have been issued...

1 upvote
Richard Murdey

Except, you know, when it does sell. X100 was pretty popular as I remember... everyone going gaga over the retro look and feel. The manual controls were much lauded. You don't hear people complaining that the M9 has a shutter speed dial on the top plate... and no autofocus!!

But this is where Nikon got it wrong: this camera is designed to appeal to both the "match needle", Nikkor Auto crowd ... and the 3D matrix, tracking-AF crowd. With the predictable result of producing a cluttered, complicated, large and expensive camera. And then Nikon has to go and market it as the embodiment of "pure photography". Ouch!

Comment edited 60 seconds after posting
1 upvote
ifonly

You mean Nikon produced an over priced under featured camera?.....say it isn't so!!!

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

Except neither point is true.

In other news good Leica and Zeiss lenses are worth those prices--including the new F/2.0 50mm Leica M.

0 upvotes
Zoran K

"You quickly realize that you've got the shutter mechanism and AF of a D610 with a 50% 'retro tax' added. And while you may get the D4's high ISO image quality, you don't get its low-light autofocus or backlit controls, both of which contribute hugely to its shooting capability in poor light."

3 upvotes
DELETED88781

I normally tend to criticize but this a super professional review.
Max

Comment edited 47 seconds after posting
28 upvotes
sgoldswo

Especially the bits that are wrong. They are way professional...

6 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer

There are enough "cons" here to make me wonder if Nikon will make a spectacular DF-2 or if this is as far as they will go with pure photography. Personally, I think Nikon oversold it. Imagine if this unique design had come out of nowhere, with no teasing and no expectations.

1 upvote
justmeMN

No Award - oh the humanity...

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
9 upvotes
locke_fc

Yeah, what's up with that? Did I miss some clarification from DPreview on the lack of an award for the review, or is it just not showing due to some bug?

Edit: sorry, I just read an explanation for the no award below.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Nikonparrothead

A solid balanced review. As an aside, what exactly do you people do to your cameras that have the doors falling off!

5 upvotes
agentul

they drive them really fast on dirt roads.

0 upvotes
Jack Simpson

It shouldn't have had Live View if Video wasn't an option and if it doesn't have a built-in flash why should it have infared remote?

1 upvote
RichRMA

As far as image quality goes, nothing from anywhere else matches it at higher ISOs. Even if you downsize D610 or D800 images, they are still noticeably noisier. For low-light, with lens suited to the subject so no real cropping is needed, it's unbeatable.

1 upvote
ravduc

The battery door on mine has never fallen off and the silver has the same tone all over without any variations under all kinds of lighting. DPR you must have used a pre-production model and not the final production model.

1 upvote
Barney Britton

We used a full production camera.

9 upvotes
ravduc

I still don't understand why you say that the silver has different finishes and tones. I have yet to notice this under all types of lighting (sunlight, tungsten, etc), and believe me I have searched for this many times after reading this comment from you in your preview.

1 upvote
nickkessler

The battery door has been like this on many nikon dslr's for a while. its nothing new and its not going to just fall off.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler

Possibly because the door is so large on the Df (more leverage?) we've found ours falls off much more often than, say, D800, D600, D610. D7100...

If we hadn't seen people experiencing the same thing on the forums (suggesting it's not just the one we've tested), we probably wouldn't have mentioned it. However, since there's no battery grip available, it's odd to have a door that on some examples, at least, falls off.

With regards materials and finish - the BKT button on the side of this one is a very different silver tone (it looks like plastic) from the body panels. The front plate of the camera around the lens mount feels more like plastic than the mag-alloy top and bottom of the camera. The transition between a rubber grip on the back and faux-leather on the front just doesn't give off the sense of quality that I'd expect from a camera costing that much money.

It's about more than just the tone of silver.

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
19 upvotes
ravduc

As far as I can tell the front plate around the lens mount is made of plastic on both the silver and black versions. I have checked this very carefully. For the price, this front plate should have been made of magnesium like the rest of the camera. As for the buttons on the front like the BKT button, they seem to be chromed with a finish which differs from the top, under and front plate. I have no problems with this, mainly because the buttons on the front are all chromed the same. This is all a matter of taste of course. As for the silver tone on the body, it's the same all over including the front plate.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
sgoldswo

Bonkers - I get the BKT button - I just don't recognise the rest. The battery door is actually one of the things I felt was better quality than my D800E. It might be the metal release, but maybe not...

Seriously, I don't recognise the camera I bought from this review. Every other review I've read, even Thom's (which was luke warm) yes, but this is just odd. Heavy, slow AF in low light - when did those happen? Those are just plain wrong...

0 upvotes
halai

DPR, you forgot to mention "NO VIDEO" as a con. I was looking forward to purchase this camera, then found there is no video function. It would have been a perfect camera for me. Oh well, will save my money for something else.

19 upvotes
Rickard Hansson

I don´t see "no vid" as a con in a camera made for photographing.

6 upvotes
halai

With these days and age...YES. It is almost consider a cripple camera without video. For people like me to love take pictures and record videos of family and friends. Not to mention wedding photographers who records clips of the couple walking down the aisle.

12 upvotes
PaulDavis

Someone that enjoys photography and has a family may want a camera with video.

2 upvotes
KonstantinosK

Bad video has been counted as a con in other great cameras with great image quality. Why not in this one? Just because it's retro?...

3 upvotes
sgoldswo

Thats a positive...

4 upvotes
locke_fc

Lack of video, or mediocre quality thereof has been listed as a con for many cameras, if memory serves right. So I'd agree it's odd it's not listed here.

2 upvotes
new boyz

"I don´t see "no vid" as a con in a camera made for photographing."

I remember DPR wrote "No dedicated movie button" under the 'cons' list in the Pentax K-5 review. So sometimes video matters even for a camera made for photography.

0 upvotes
MPA1

If I want video, I'll buy one of those things called a 'video camera'....

0 upvotes
PaulDavis

You would think the rating would be more dependent on the value. That's really what it comes down to for most buyers anyways. The best bang for your buck. This camera certainly isn't it. Not when you can get a Sony a7 for a thousand less.

4 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer

I don't think the Df was ever about value. Look at the comments of people studying the "silver" finish to see if the color varies in different light.

0 upvotes
RichRMA

The doors falling of a $2700 body! Nikon, what has happened to you? That said, it still "looks" good.

0 upvotes
ravduc

It's never fallen off mine.

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey

I have a very wide tolerance for camera appearance (K-01, V1, even Sony a7 to a point), but the aesthetics of the Df make me wince to look at it. It's just .. I dunno .. at some basic level it doesn't work. The proportions are unbalanced? It's too big? It's trying too hard to look small? Unhappy marriage of analog and digital design elements?

I think that its just TOO MUCH CAMERA. So many controls and buttons, add-ons and angles that there are no design lines of an actual camera left to look at. The EM-1 suffers a little in the same way, but being smaller and crucially much thinner in stature its visually not so off-putting.

9 upvotes
Marty4650

Maybe it's just me.... but the Df looks like it was designed in East Germany in 1967. Yeah... retro, but not good retro....

The FM never looked that cluttered.

10 upvotes
CameraLabTester

When you start to run out of innovation, you start digging the closets and attics that remind you of how great you were in the past.

Yes, drape over that mediocre digital contraption with the beauty of a begone era.

Innovation is dead.

Long live Nikon.

and Canon. (coming out with an AE-II? why not?)

and Pentax. (MX rising from the grave)

Keep those Jurassic Models coming in, folks!

.

9 upvotes
Devendra

Basically its not for you. You could have simply said that, but instead you took the not-so-scenic route.
Now what is your opinion about old classic cars with modern engine under the hood? Oh dont worry, you dont have to explain it here. :)

2 upvotes
new boyz

Actually, I Nikon makes digital FM2, that might become something. Not just mimics some of FM2 features but sized like FM2, with FM2 ergonomic. But digital.

3 upvotes
aarif

After using it for 20 days I disagree with few point

1)AF coverage might be a bit small but its accurate fast even in low light I also use the D600/D3s
2)does not show battery life true but the battery is very impressive 2000 shots easily
3)light weight making it easy to carry around

3 upvotes
PaulDavis

Sorry but that's ridiculous that it doesn't show you battery life in a $2700.00 camera...

13 upvotes
Richard Butler

It has a simple 4-bar battery indicator on the shoulder LCD, it just doesn't let you check the % charge or number of times that battery has been charged (as the D610 does, for instance).

@aarif - focusing is highly lens dependent but I've not had much luck getting the camera to focus in even moderately low light (especially with the 50mm F1.8). If shot in all-points, 3D mode it's better but when trying to focus somewhere specific, it sounds like we've had a very different experience from you.

9 upvotes
sgoldswo

Richard, my experience is the same as @aarif. I don't get the slow to AF comment. I did have a D600 body that was quite slow to AF, and it eventually turned out the AF module was defective. Just a thought...

1 upvote
sandy b

Richard, do you monitor the forums? There have been no complaints about the AF, mostly praise, or at worse a wash with the D600. Nor in any other reviews I have seen. In fact i think the only post with quality issues was 2 people about the battery door.

2 upvotes
Hasa

16000 iso looks fantastic with that old 105mm F2.5 in the portrait shot in the samples gallery.

0 upvotes
Richard Murdey

Wow, that was probably the harshest review I've ever read at on this website.

1 upvote
Paul1974

I can't believe what I'm reading! DPreview finally actually admit that their pixel-level comparisons are, well, not really fair...

"Part of this is down to pixel count (this is a pixel-level test, which gives low-pixel-count cameras an advantage) but the Df's sensor does exceptionally well at high ISOs. Take a look at our test scene if you want to see a normalized result, which gives a clearer comparison of how these cameras, with their different pixel counts, compare when looking at the image as a whole."

0 upvotes
diforbes

Score of 81 seems high for the number and type of "cons."

11 upvotes
ThePhilips

It's OK in case of Canons and Nikons.

It's only other inferior brands which must suffer for their faults.

0 upvotes
whtchocla7e

The 70's called... they do NOT want this camera back. It's ugly as hell...

42 upvotes
mike kobal

early 80' will hesitantly take it though....

8 upvotes
inframan

This comment is so subjective, I'm not sure what it contributes to the conversation.

Back before digicams, people didn't pay that much attention to the looks of a camera (except for the TLR vs. SLR vs. RF folks), just to what they could accomplish with it.

3 upvotes
Davidfstop

That was quick!!!

How long have most of the non canonikon users been waiting for reviews.

Comment edited 32 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Richard Butler

The Df has generated more interest than any other camera this year.

Also, we didn't prioritise it ahead of the Panasonic GM1, nor the Sony A7 and A7R, which are proving to be more complex, so their reviews are taking longer.

But other than trying to respond to reader interest and not putting it ahead of other 'non Canikon' cameras, your point stands.

2 upvotes
Davidfstop

The Df is a fascinating concept, I agree. In fact I wish Pentax had thought of it. Can you imagine a FF LX?
Now that would be cool....

It was an excellent review BTW.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Gesture

It's not elegant like the retro cameras we remember fondly. Take a look at a Pentax K1000, Minolta X-11 or XE-7, Contax 139, Nikkormat FTN, etc. Far too many bells, whistles, knows, buttons, etc. Can't anyone simplify the DSLR experience. That would be welcome.

8 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff

If there was anyone to do that in a pleasing retro fashion, it would probably be Leica. Technically, an S2 is a dSLR, albeit a medium format one.

0 upvotes
steve ohlhaber

Nothing is simpler than the Canon SLR main wheel. You just program what you want into each notch of that main wheel and that's it. Having to change every control when you need to takes forever. If you switch between tripod and handheld stuff frequently, then you go through everything. Its too difficult. It depends on your shooting style, but I think canon pretty much got it right. Maybe adding more notches to that wheel would improve it. Having everything broken out into its own knob makes it harder it seems. Some people may like it though.

1 upvote
completelyrandomstuff

I never liked Canon operation for some reason. My favorite features are settings on older series nikons (N90s, button plus a knob turn) and the 'hyper' mode on Pentax.

0 upvotes
Alan Brown

Hmmm Contax 139..
Takes me back in time.. fond memories there. That was a smooth operator..

Now, back to the present. :)

0 upvotes
Kurt_K

Not even a silver award. I hope the dpreview staff are prepared for some Nikon fanboy rage.

3 upvotes
Richard Murdey

Fanboy rage is directed at Nikon, for not giving them a D400...

The Df has few friends. Even those that might agree with the design direction object to its price tag. (This is a recurring theme with Nikon cameras, e.g. Nikon V1, marketing should really sit up and take notice that the brand image is starting to suffer as a result.)

4 upvotes
Ben O Connor

THUS;

I would pull the triiger for Pentax K-3 Silver body and lots of silver HD coated lenses !

Wish to own some 3.000 € to buy that Pentax kit :( damn! its hard to be married sometimes :D

7 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff

I came to the conclusion that lenses are for us, what jewelry is for our wives. That being said it's good to have someone making sure your LBA doesn't get off hand.

3 upvotes
KonstantinosK

Why silver, mate? I think it makes the camera look cheap and plastic, like the late models of CRT televisions... (I'd love it in red, though!)

1 upvote
harold1968

the conclusion and summary of this camera isn't particularly good.
its not bad, its a good camera, but many people will form their own judgement based on cost and functionality.
Nevertheless it gets 81%. I really don't understand that, simply that dpreview are completely inconsistent with their summaries and their scores.

Comment edited 25 seconds after posting
5 upvotes
Richard Butler

The scoring is based heavily on image quality - something the Df is really good at.

6 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff

sorry, but this isn't obvious to me. If I understand correctly, the scoring is an objective measure of the various qualities, and awards are based on the editors feeling about the camera, the price/performance ratio and other less tangible measures?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
Richard Shih

Camera scores and ratings explained: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/4416254604/camera-scores-ratings-explained

Comment edited 13 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
Richard Butler

@completelyrandomstuff - that's exactly right. The scoring is as objective as possible and is weighted towards image quality. The award (or lack of it, in this case), is the overall summary from the reviewer's perspective.

6 upvotes
harold1968

ok that makes sense.
that single sentence summary is probably best repeated after each score ....

2 upvotes
Richard Butler

@harold1968 - that's not a bad idea.

2 upvotes
jdu_sg

Another good idea is noticing this text + link that appears occasionally in some of the reviews

Click here to learn about the changes to our scoring system and what these numbers mean.

1 upvote
rb59020

My D5200 is better.

7 upvotes
new boyz

For the money, yes.

3 upvotes
HowaboutRAW

rb59020:

"better" for what? Slow buffer? And lower IQ at high ISOs?

0 upvotes
completelyrandomstuff

ISO-100, ISO25600... well, that escalated quickly.

1 upvote
Rocket09

So they put the best low light sensor in a camera with an AF system that is not great in low light??? Oh Nikon...

38 upvotes
Segaman

With a bit of perseverance, it will usually find focus eventually (even in genuinely low light), but the amount of work you need to put in to get it to focus is not really acceptable. Overall, the performance is not up to the standards you'd hope for from a camera costing this much money - especially one built around a sensor whose main appeal in this case is its low light performance.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
8 upvotes
sgoldswo

No, the review's wrong. It's fine to focus in low light.

Comment edited 11 seconds after posting
6 upvotes
Richard Shih

Differing definitions of low light, perhaps. In casual use it was hunting quite a bit in a dimly lit bar setting. Once it did establish a focus lock the pictures were great.

3 upvotes
sebastian huvenaars
1 upvote
Total comments: 1627
5678