The worst thing about the DF is the Disappointment

Started Nov 9, 2013 | Discussions thread
michaeladawson Forum Pro • Posts: 12,907
Re: The worst thing about the DF is the Disappointment

Kodachrome200 wrote:

So lots of folks have been calling the retro DF ill conceived but I dont think that is true. I think it was a staggeringly good idea they just forgot to include anything good about the idea in the actual camera.

I agree.  I really want the retro Df idea.  I don't need the actual Df implementation.  It's incomplete.  I could care less about the cost.  But...  If you look at the specs of the Df and remove the retro styling/knobs it's a very nice camera on its own.  If I was in the market for a digital camera I might buy it.  But the expectation of many (most?) was that this was going to be a real retro camera.  I think you exaggerate when you say "forgot to include anything good about the idea" but I agree that it only went halfway towards the over-hyped expectations.

I've talked to people that look at the outside of the camera and say "yuck".  Most people don't want a retro looking body.  So you're dealing with a much smaller set of people that want this retro camera.  Nikon should have done a better job of meeting the expectations of this crowd.  And I leave price out of it.  I would pay a premium for a proper "manual era" execution.

The first time I ever shot an autofocus camera I immediately though "what is wrong with the viewfinder" . There was nothing wrong with the viewfinder but having only shot manual focus cameras up to that point i had always had manual focusing aids. It didnt hit me till then they woulddnt be included on a camera that had auto focus. Now I understand why. You get a brighter viewfinder. It probably is worth it in most cases too. But building a digital FM that had an available autofocus but had a great ground glass screen with microprisms and a split prism. It would allow for photographers to better check the cameras focusing and would allow some of this fabulous manual focus glass out there to be much more realistically useful. The nikon FM was also a very small camera and that would have been a great value too. They should have made the camera just as small as was possible. this camera is not the smallest and lightest full frame dslr on the market. It should have been. There aslo really is no reason for its price. It could have been cheaper. The low end of the full frame market is where this camera could have been a hit.

Also at that price it should have shot video and surely should have got the 51pt AF system

It was none of those things witch the idea behind it promised. It was just a bit of styling on an overpriced camera

-- hide signature --

Mike Dawson

 michaeladawson's gear list:michaeladawson's gear list
Nikon D810 Nikon D7200 Nikon D5 Fujifilm X-T2 Fujifilm X-H1 +30 more
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
(unknown member)
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow