Considering a Df

[BudgetTraveller]

It's over a decade old, so no parts / can no longer be serviced. Not much of a worry when a camera is a sub $4-500, but at over $1200 for a decent used one, it's approaching the price of a refurbished Zf directly from Nikon ($1600).

Nikon still lists the Nikon Df as repairable and have parts in stock.

As current as of July 2024.

 

[JoeyJoJoJuniorShabbaDoo]

No Nikon DSLR has ever had a viewfinder as big or bright as their film SLRs, such as the F3 or F4-6. That is just by design.

There's nothing about a DSLR design that prevents having a viewfinder as big and bright as a film SLR. Canon has had viewfinders with magnifications like 0.76x and high-eyepoints in the 20mm range. The only reason most DSLRs don't is because they're primarily platforms for selling you and I new AF system lenses. The Df came along and teased us with being able to breathe new life into our old AI and AI-S Nikkors. Classic over-promise but under deliver.

I owned a Df for 5 years and I never had any issues with its viewfinder and it didn't slow me down unless I was using a manual focus lens, in which case I pretty much had to shoot that at f8 and use the hyperfocal length setting because if I focused on the focusing screen, it was out of focus (had to use the green dot, which was a pain - and this was true for the three different Df bodies I owned over the years).

You never had any issues with the viewfinder, yet you could never get an in-focus shot using a manual focus lens without resorting to "f/8 and be there"? I think you just proved my point.

The Df was supposed to harken back to the film camera days, which were mostly small and lightweight. I had no issues with the lighter heft of the Df body at all, and I think I prefer that overall to a heavier body like the current Zf...

But the Df is heavier than the Zf - 760g vs 710g. It's also significantly heavier than an FM2 (540g) and the F3 (715g). All of those cameras feature significantly better build quality.

No parts? Your source? I doubt Nikon has stopped servicing the Df.

Obviously it's gonna depend on which country you reside in cause each Nikon branch has different parts availability as well as rules surrounding grey-market repairs. I have come across a few Reddit posts which leaves me less-than-confident in the serviceability of this model, especially considering the price. Nikon USA is really anal about repairing grey-market cameras (even outside of warranty), so all those minty Df units from Japan may as well be unicorns.

 

[JoeyJoJoJuniorShabbaDoo]

Nikon Zf refurbs down to $1200

https://www.nikonusa.com/p/z-f-refurbished/1761Q

 

[yray]

there was a D700 with 15k clicks on FM this morning, pounced right on it didn’t look back! a whopping $300. this is definitely on the upper limit of what I could handle size wise so the single digit D’s are off the table.

my heart would still love a Df, if and when prices soften a bit or I’m more flush.

I'm in the same boat - looking for a DF but the prices are way too high for me. In the mean time I got a really cheap D800 to satisfy my (F )DSLR itch.
Hoping a reasonable priced DF will show up

The Nikon Df, like the Olympus PEN-F, the Fuji X-100 series have developed a cult following. Their prices are based on that following. There's really no justification for the higher prices really, other than it is a special camera in the hearts of its followers. Whereas the D800 is plentiful and hence it is worth less in the used market even if specs wise, better than the Df.

I actually love my Df more than my other cameras I have. The D800 would ideally be a good companion to my Df, but have yet to feel the itch to get one.

You can add the Fujifilm X-Pro series to the list.

When you see that a Df is about 50 to 100% more expensive than a used D4, and still more expensive than a D4S, you know things are silly.

Not really. D4 is a lot to lug around, Df -- not so much. That's a big difference in usability. There were many times in the somewhat distant past when I opted for the D700 over D3S because of the size and weight difference. That difference between D4 and Df is a whole lot greater. At the end of the day, usability often trumps all other capabilities.

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

Me, I'd rather have the industrial design of the Df than that of the D4. It's the old school way that ended with the F4. And I greatly prefer it to the new school way of the F5. This, regardless of the number of F5 and later bodies I have had.

Plus the last Nikon model list for what they are repairing lists the Df but not the D4.

Stan

 

[camerosity]

No Nikon DSLR has ever had a viewfinder as big or bright as their film SLRs, such as the F3 or F4-6. That is just by design.

There's nothing about a DSLR design that prevents having a viewfinder as big and bright as a film SLR. Canon has had viewfinders with magnifications like 0.76x and high-eyepoints in the 20mm range. The only reason most DSLRs don't is because they're primarily platforms for selling you and I new AF system lenses. The Df came along and teased us with being able to breathe new life into our old AI and AI-S Nikkors. Classic over-promise but under deliver.

Yes, there is. Because we are now projecting the image on to a sensor and not on to a piece of film, there is a ton of electronics in the mirror box that have to support that operation (this is why the D700 has only 92% viewfinder coverage, they had to limit the view through the eyepiece to fit the ultrasonic sensor cleaning mechanism). My F3HP has the biggest and brightest viewfinder I've ever experienced on a 35mm film camera body, but it's ancient history compared to the last generation of Nikon digital SLR cameras. Even the D850's viewfinder couldn't compete with the brightness and clarity of the F3HP, again, for a reason...

I owned a Df for 5 years and I never had any issues with its viewfinder and it didn't slow me down unless I was using a manual focus lens, in which case I pretty much had to shoot that at f8 and use the hyperfocal length setting because if I focused on the focusing screen, it was out of focus (had to use the green dot, which was a pain - and this was true for the three different Df bodies I owned over the years).

You never had any issues with the viewfinder, yet you could never get an in-focus shot using a manual focus lens without resorting to "f/8 and be there"? I think you just proved my point.

Not really. It was a defect in manufacturing, meaning the mirror was just ever so slightly out of alignment. If I had a good tech I could have probably asked them to adjust it to make it focus, but it wasn't important to me as I don't care to shoot with manual focus lenses much anymore. They are old optical designs and the current AF Nikon lenses beat them easily.

The Df was supposed to harken back to the film camera days, which were mostly small and lightweight. I had no issues with the lighter heft of the Df body at all, and I think I prefer that overall to a heavier body like the current Zf...

But the Df is heavier than the Zf - 760g vs 710g. It's also significantly heavier than an FM2 (540g) and the F3 (715g). All of those cameras feature significantly better build quality.

Maybe because the Df hasn't been in my camera bag since early 2021, but it never felt heavy to me, and I traveled with it often and enjoyed its lightweight handling. The Zf feels heavier, and it is definitely a better build compared to the plastic-fantastic Df.

No parts? Your source? I doubt Nikon has stopped servicing the Df.

Obviously it's gonna depend on which country you reside in cause each Nikon branch has different parts availability as well as rules surrounding grey-market repairs. I have come across a few Reddit posts which leaves me less-than-confident in the serviceability of this model, especially considering the price. Nikon USA is really anal about repairing grey-market cameras (even outside of warranty), so all those minty Df units from Japan may as well be unicorns.

Nikon services the Df, so they have parts. Once it is taken out of factory service, no more parts will be available other than from donor cameras. And as I live in the USA, I never buy a non-USA body, though I've heard recently that Nikon may no longer be restricting service to only USA sold cameras.

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

As far as the VF goes, keep in mind that the F5 VFs (like the F3, the F5 has multiple VFs) worked just fine with a sensor in place of the film.

It did sport a masking plate for framing since the sensor used was either APS-C or APS-H. If Kodak had a full frame sensor, it would not have needed a masking plate.

The other option would have been to add a framing line to the focusing screen, which was the method used with the n90 body used prior to the F5. But, then, the n90 had a fixed VF and not a swappable one. Plus the n90 didn't have all those optional drop-in focusing screens. It's have been a PIA to have a separate line of F5 screens with masking lines. A masking plate made more sense.

It isn't the sensor in place of film that is the 'why' behind the VF design choices.

Stan

 

[PDX700]

I'm a long time Minolta fan (X-700 ) and 35mm film camera aficionado. The equipment tends to interest me more than the photography. I was reluctant to venture into the world of digital, so I don't follow digital cameras, and would limit myself to the 108MP camera on my Samsung Galaxy Note20 Ultra.

A few years ago, while browsing the offerings of preowned film cameras online, I stumbled onto the Olympus OM-D E-M10 Mark II. It caught my attention due to its classic design and I didn't realize it was a digital camera until I read the listing. I decided to try it and found a seller who's a photographer, had moved on to something bigger, better and newer, and was selling their camera bag with a near mint condition camera and a couple of lenses. It's an absolute joy and I felt that it's the only digital camera that I'll ever want or need.

Fast forward to a few months ago and once again, I stumbled onto the Nikon Df online. It immediately caught my attention, especially being full-frame. I read about it being a sorta niche digital camera for folks with a fondness for classic 35mm film cameras. I thought, "that's me!", so I had to have it! I've never bought a camera this expensive and I was determined not to purchase something in only adequate condition.

I searched quite a while and eventually found a Df camera body in the least likely of places. It was listed on Amazon (U.S.) as "like new" by a seller from Japan. The pictures in the listing were poor quality, so there wasn't much detail, but with Amazon's return policy, I felt there was little to no risk involved. Lo and behold, it arrived in absolute mint condition, with a shutter count of 2,406, at a price only slightly over $1K! Based on the serial number and judging from the Photosynthesis site, it was manufactured in the last year or two at most of production.

I can't speak well enough about the camera. Sure, there might be cameras which can do more for less, but this camera is in a league if its own. I'm still learning how to use it and have a long way to go, but to hold it and close my eyes, it's every bit like a 35mm film camera of days gone by. I encourage anyone who desires the tactile experience of a classic camera, in a modern digital world, to shoot with a Df... but I suggest you wear a shirt with a large collar and bell-bottom pants to really get into the feel!

 

[taxidrivr]

it truly does feel like a really unique blend of analog and digital, purely by virtue of being a mirrored SLR at its core. the shutter clack alone is quite delightful to the ear.

nice pickup for the price! I considered a cheaper example though upon learning Nikon doesn’t service grey market cameras, I was adamant on getting one with a US serial in the event of needing any work.

 

[PDX700]

it truly does feel like a really unique blend of analog and digital, purely by virtue of being a mirrored SLR at its core. the shutter clack alone is quite delightful to the ear.

nice pickup for the price! I considered a cheaper example though upon learning Nikon doesn’t service grey market cameras, I was adamant on getting one with a US serial in the event of needing any work.

Interestingly, when searching, the amount of Japanese market Df cameras vastly outnumbered the amount of US market cameras, including from US based sellers. There wasn't a US camera with my preferred condition and budget to be found.

Nikon is renowned for their quality, but should anything happen (knock on wood), I'll simply need to find a reputable Nikon specialist.

 

[BebuLamar]

I have the Df since December 26th 2013, a month after the release date. I like it a lot. What I don't like about it is that it's too big yet too light.

I did have problem with it in 2018 when the meter went out. It cost me $400 to have it fixed.

 

[Sensei Rob]

There's nothing about a DSLR design that prevents having a viewfinder as big and bright as a film SLR. Canon has had viewfinders with magnifications like 0.76x and high-eyepoints in the 20mm range. The only reason most DSLRs don't is because they're primarily platforms for selling you and I new AF system lenses. The Df came along and teased us with being able to breathe new life into our old AI and AI-S Nikkors. Classic over-promise but under deliver.

With the Nikon DK-17M eyepiece, it makes the viewfinder the same size as the one in the FM2n, which helps tremendously.

I owned a Df for 5 years and I never had any issues with its viewfinder and it didn't slow me down unless I was using a manual focus lens, in which case I pretty much had to shoot that at f8 and use the hyperfocal length setting because if I focused on the focusing screen, it was out of focus (had to use the green dot, which was a pain - and this was true for the three different Df bodies I owned over the years).

You never had any issues with the viewfinder, yet you could never get an in-focus shot using a manual focus lens without resorting to "f/8 and be there"? I think you just proved my point.

The Df was supposed to harken back to the film camera days, which were mostly small and lightweight. I had no issues with the lighter heft of the Df body at all, and I think I prefer that overall to a heavier body like the current Zf...

But the Df is heavier than the Zf - 760g vs 710g. It's also significantly heavier than an FM2 (540g) and the F3 (715g). All of those cameras feature significantly better build quality.

I agree. I'd much prefer if the Df had pro build. Having said that, cameras like the 5D series and the notoriously tough Pentax DSLRs also have a plastic mirrorbox, and no one seems to complain about their build quality.

As for the Zf, even though it has a metal chassis, they messed up by having a plastic bottom plate. As a result it just feels extremely cheap compared to things like the FM2n and F2. Then again, the F2 makes everything feel cheap.

To me, the Zf and Df feel very similar in terms of build quality, although, clearly, the Zf is built slightly better, having a metal chassis and such.

 

[WarrenInOntario]

Love my Df, best and most versatile DSLR for travel and general shooting IMO.

Having said that Nikon did replace the shutter under warranty with only 3500 actuations years ago. No problems since.

 

[studio460]

Thanks for posting that! Very interesting that Nikon Df repairs are still supported. I suppose I can just drop by the Los Angeles Nikon depot and check its current support status there as well for US customers.

I searched for a Df discussion thread, but I guess this one will do. After an insane buying spree this Xmas of the current crop of Z-system bodes and lenses, I began to get nostalgic over both my Nikon FM2 and Nikon Zf.

A quick check of its DxO low-light score surprised me with one slightly better than the D4 at 3,274. The Df actually holds its own compared with the Nikon Z6II which clocks in at 3,303 (the top-line Z9 scores an astonishing 4,505 low-light ISO "sports" score; no score for the Z6III could be found).

Numbers aside, I'm of course drawn to resurrecting my Df for reasons other than technical; though, I did want to confirm its baseline-ISO performance profile since all my other bodies are now current-line, high-performers (e.g., D6, Z9, Zf).

I mainly wanted to mount my legacy Nikkor 43-86mm f/3.5 F pre-AI lens, which according to a certain San Diego reviewer, "The original Nikon 43-86mm is the worst lens Nikon has ever made" . . . and, that's precisely why I bought it. In the age of clinically perfect optics and new AI-enhanced mirrorless-bodies, I'm seeking the 43-86's organic lens-artifacts for creative-effect, along with my AF-Nikkor 18mm f/2.8D (another one of "Nikon's 10 worst lenses").

I'm now lovingly cleaning my barely-used Df and just ordered a new set of batteries . . .

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

Keep in mind that there were two versions of the 43-86. The first not so hot, the second was quite good.

Stan

 

[studio460]

Hi,

Keep in mind that there were two versions of the 43-86. The first not so hot, the second was quite good.

Stan

Yes—that's a key point and worth pointing out—the older one is of poor quality while the newer one is fine. To quote from Ken Rockwell's site: "The 43-86mm came in two versions. This first horrible version has the lettering inside the filter ring. The later version (1975-1982) is a completely different lens, and is just fine. It has its lettering outside the filter ring." —kenrockwell.com.

I happen to have the pre-1975 version (i.e., the "worst" one), which is the one I wanted. Again, I deliberately chose this version specifically for its lens-flare, ghosting, and other artifacts—my goal being to exploit the lens' faults for effect (same with the AF-Nikkor 18mm f/2.8D and its propensity for lens-flare).

 

[studio460]

Got my Df up and running! I have to say, I'm really impressed with the images (save for a bit of CA on the Pellegrino label). But thanks to the 50mm f/1.2 AI-s I was able to shoot almost all of it at 100 ISO. Here's some shots around my home office:

It was a real kick to shoot with a manual-focus AI-s lens! I don't know how many clicks my Df has (I bought it brand-new), but I cleaned it all up and it looks brand-new. A few nits I noticed while shooting with manual-focus lenses on the Df:

• I really miss the center split-prism/micro-prism focusing-collar on my first SLR.
• The Df's focus-indicator is awkward to view in the extreme lower-left.
• I find it difficult to focus on a matte-screen quickly with any confidence.

 

[Stan Disbrow]

Hi,

Ah. Good. You knew about the two variants and got the one you wanted. I could see you getting the newer one and wondering why it wasn't what you thought it was.

When manually focusing my Df, I use the F4 method (given in the manual for the F4) of focusing past the confirmation dot and then reversing focus until it comes on again.

There were split image screens from 3rd party outfits for the Df. I don't know as you can still get one today. I had originally planned on getting one when I bought my Df, but the F4 focusing method worked well enough that I didn't buy another screen.

Stan

 

[studio460]

. . . There were split image screens from 3rd party outfits for the Df. I don't know as you can still get one today. I had originally planned on getting one when I bought my Df, but the F4 focusing method worked well enough that I didn't buy another screen.

Stan

Yes, I've been experimenting with similar techniques, playing, "catch the circle." Now, I recall looking into the Katseye third-party focusing screens at the time I got the Df, but unfortunately, never followed through; though, I doubt they're still available. Yup—just checked—It looks like they called it quits way back in 2005. Oh, well.

I got hooked on the center split-image/microprism-collar screen in my Canon FTBn that my parents bought me in ninth-grade—it was great! Still the best style of focusing screen I've ever used—really loved that camera. But as my interests matured, I switched to a Nikon FM/FE combo after high school (which was all the rage in the late-1970s), and of course, the rest is history . . .

 

[PDX700]

Yes, I've been experimenting with similar techniques, playing, "catch the circle." Now, I recall looking into the Katseye third-party focusing screens at the time I got the Df, but unfortunately, never followed through; though, I doubt they're still available. Yup—just checked—It looks like they called it quits way back in 2005. Oh, well.

I got hooked on the center split-image/microprism-collar screen in my Canon FTBn that my parents bought me in ninth-grade—it was great! Still the best style of focusing screen I've ever used—really loved that camera. But as my interests matured, I switched to a Nikon FM/FE combo after high school (which was all the rage in the late-1970s), and of course, the rest is history . . .

There appears to be a Nikon option.

Mod: Nikon Df Split Prism

Hello, friends! This week was just a pain for me – literally! I had a new gout attack and my left foot was super painful! I haven’t gotten anything like this for 2 or so years now and a…

richardhaw.com

https://ebay.com/itm/396074903914