Nikon DF Images and Experiences...

Margu said:
Why Nikon put the D4 sensor in DF and not the D800?
Click to expand...

My guess is that a 36 Mpx sensor would require so much processing power that is would have made the Df much larger and require too much power.
The Sony A7r can remain small because it lack a mirror - but note that its battery life is much shorter than a full frame DSLR.
 
Lynn says : " I did not buy a Epson RD-1, Leica M8 or M9, D700, D600, etc and etc. not because they were not very capable cameras, but they were not the camera I was looking for." I say: "me too!"

Thanks Lynn for the photos and the review. An interesting camera, I'll have opportunity to see and try one in my usual shop next week. Not sure if ok for me but worthwhile to try. I'll bring a couple of my lens.

robert
 
I picked up my kit today. So far I love it. Very similar to my D700. Obviously the ergonomics are a little different, but it handles nicely. The kit lenses is super sharp and the redesigned shell is much nicer looking.

Here's my first shot with the camera:


When I went to pick it up I noticed they had what Ken Rockwell called the "worst Nikon lens in history", the 43-86mm f/3.5 for $60 so I grabbed it. I love the character of these supposedly bad lenses. This one has that kick-ass 70's cheap cinema feel to it. Yeah, I put a $60 lens on a $3000 camera. It really IS all about the glass. :D

 
Davewolfs said:
How does it feel in hand over the D700 in terms of size/weight?
Click to expand...

The D700 is more comfortable. It's ergonomically designed. My pinky finger has a place to rest, your shutter finger is perfectly positioned, the front command dial is spot on. It's got heft to it. Still my favorite of all Nikon cameras ever.

The Dƒ is shorter and much lighter. It doesn't have the nice cushiony feel of the rubber and my pinky finger dangles. If it were I smidge taller I wouldn't complain (everyone is in for the ultra-compact these days). The shutter-release button isn't right there, but it's not uncomfortable to find. It's just like an old F (I put one on hold today). The aperture dial is a little awkward, it's smallish and is a stretch to reach in portrait orientation. It's much lighter. I'd say about D90-ish, maybe a little heavier.

It's definitely got that old camera feel to it. It's not a DXXX. Those things are designed for all day pro shooting. While this will be my main camera from now on I'll probably use my D700 over it on 8-10hr sporting events.

I haven't put any pro zooms on it yet, so I can't really tell how it's going to balance out, but the 50mm SE is perfect for it. I'm glad I decided to go kit instead of body only. The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 actually kinda dwarfs it, but it's still a nicely balanced combo.

Now anything that sounds detrimental don't take it that way. This is a camera that isn't built for comfort. Nor is it built for speed. It's stylish and that comes with the price of not being the most comfortable camera. I knew that going in. This is definitely a "thinking photographer's" camera. Any design quirks are pretty obvious going in. But I like the style and I'm sure I'll get used to it and it will feel like "mine" in a short time.

The IQ is stunning. I'm shooting Gary Clark Jr. tonight so this will be my first chance at putting both the Dƒ and my new M9-P through the low-light concert test.
 
In a perfect world I'd like to shoot side by side with Lynn with my D700 and a Zeiss prime for a direct comparison of the two systems and how the Zeiss renders compared to the heritage primes and how the D700 sensor stacks up against the DF.

If we lived a little closer? :D
 
I don't want this to sound as patronising as it inevitably will do, BUT good on you. If you liked what you saw and ended up buying one despite the naysayers then thats a good thing. People forget that cameras are as personal as the vision that we express with them.

The Df intrigued me hugely but as a freelancer I need to make sure every bit of kit counts and the Df wasn't quite different enough to make sound financial sense.

I'm interested to see how 6-12 months may make a difference to those that sling the 'fanboy' phrase around, perhaps by then it will be just another camera option.

I hope you're loving it....and if truth be told, when prices come down I may throw a bit more money Nikons way.
 
I'm a full-time photographer. And I write Nikon Digital Field Guides so I've owned almost every DSLR Nikon has put out since the D1. I can pick and choose which cameras I want to keep. Out of the most current FX crop, the D800-gone, D600-gone, Went D700 over D3 because I like the removable grip (plus the grip has a toggle the D3 didn't), the D4 was too much money for me and we don't write guides for the high-end pro cameras. The D700 I've had since the the day it was released. It was the first D700 in Austin TX. Out of the fancier, higher MP cameras the D700 was the best of them all.

They will never make a mini D4 like the D700 was to the D3. The Dƒ is as close as we're going to get. This was pretty much the only option for me. There were a lot of small niggles with the D600 that pretty much made me hate that camera. The D800 files are just too damn big for the type of work I do. The Dƒ is what I need in a camera. My D700 has over 650,000 clicks on it. I had the shutter replaced at about 550,000, but the camera is beat up. It's seen hundreds of concerts and taken a lot of great pics. Some of the new menu features I liked in the newer cameras are lacking in the D700 so I'm putting her out to pasture. She'll still get a workout now and again, but it's time for some fresh blood.

The only thing that bothers me is the stupid 39-point DX AF array. I can deal with all of the other quirks.

(My other keeper Nikon? The D5300. This is and incredible little DX camera)
 
I really, really, really want to hate Nikon for making a camera that, to me, seems to have the controls in all the right places and then set such a high price. Now, I need to figure out how to buy one. Thanks for nothing, KoNickon! ;)
 
The D700 is more comfortable. It's ergonomically designed. My pinky finger has a place to rest, your shutter finger is perfectly positioned, the front command dial is spot on. It's got heft to it. Still my favorite of all Nikon cameras ever.

The Dƒ is shorter and much lighter. It doesn't have the nice cushiony feel of the rubber and my pinky finger dangles. If it were I smidge taller I wouldn't complain (everyone is in for the ultra-compact these days). The shutter-release button isn't right there, but it's not uncomfortable to find. It's just like an old F (I put one on hold today). The aperture dial is a little awkward, it's smallish and is a stretch to reach in portrait orientation. It's much lighter. I'd say about D90-ish, maybe a little heavier.

It's definitely got that old camera feel to it. It's not a DXXX. Those things are designed for all day pro shooting. While this will be my main camera from now on I'll probably use my D700 over it on 8-10hr sporting events.

I haven't put any pro zooms on it yet, so I can't really tell how it's going to balance out, but the 50mm SE is perfect for it. I'm glad I decided to go kit instead of body only. The Sigma 35mm f/1.4 actually kinda dwarfs it, but it's still a nicely balanced combo.

Now anything that sounds detrimental don't take it that way. This is a camera that isn't built for comfort. Nor is it built for speed. It's stylish and that comes with the price of not being the most comfortable camera. I knew that going in. This is definitely a "thinking photographer's" camera. Any design quirks are pretty obvious going in. But I like the style and I'm sure I'll get used to it and it will feel like "mine" in a short time.

The IQ is stunning. I'm shooting Gary Clark Jr. tonight so this will be my first chance at putting both the Dƒ and my new M9-P through the low-light concert test.
Click to expand...

Even though I really like my Df... I would not replace a D700 with the Df for your line of work. I would even be very hesitant to recommend the Df to a photographer who primarily uses modern, latest generation lenses. In fact, if I was doing an assignment where I needed to use zoom lenses, AF, AE, etc with the latest generation of Nikkors, I would definitely not choose the Df. I would be grabbing a D3, D700, or D4.

The Df was designed to use legacy MF Nikkormat lenses, yes, Nikon should be supplying alternate focusing screens for those wanting a split-image, but the Df focuses very well directly off the ground glass.

At first I considered the 'scroll wheels' as superfluous, but I am glad Nikon included them so that I can use the Nikon Df with the latest generation lenses if I choose to. But so far the 'scroll wheels' are redundant and unneeded to use the Df for my method of usage.

D700 has to be one of Nikon's best cameras ever, the Df is a different beast altogether designed for different type of photographer and photography.
 
Keith said:
In a perfect world I'd like to shoot side by side with Lynn with my D700 and a Zeiss prime for a direct comparison of the two systems and how the Zeiss renders compared to the heritage primes and how the D700 sensor stacks up against the DF.

If we lived a little closer? :D
Click to expand...

Keith,

I am pretty sure that your D700 with Zeiss primes would soundly trump the Df with old Nikkor primes... but that is not the point... the old Nikkors have their own personality.

The Df definitely has enough pixels, any more resolution would tear the old lenses to pieces. The D4 sensor was a good choice in my opinion.
 
P. Lynn Miller said:
Keith,

I am pretty sure that your D700 with Zeiss primes would soundly trump the Df with old Nikkor primes... but that is not the point... the old Nikkors have their own personality.

The Df definitely has enough pixels, any more resolution would tear the old lenses to pieces. The D4 sensor was a good choice in my opinion.
Click to expand...


I really only have modern glass for my D700 and have often hankered for some legacy lenses to try on it ... particularly a portrait lens.

May have to look into this! :D
 
P. Lynn Miller said:
I would not replace a D700 with the Df for your line of work. I would even be very hesitant to recommend the Df to a photographer who primarily uses modern, latest generation lenses. In fact, if I was doing an assignment where I needed to use zoom lenses, AF, AE, etc with the latest generation of Nikkors, I would definitely not choose the Df. I would be grabbing a D3, D700, or D4.
Click to expand...

People told me I was crazy when I started shooting concerts with a Leica M8. "It's not good enough in low-light", they said. "It doesn't AF", they said.

Well, I know my craft better than just about anyone out there. If I wasn't 100% sure that I could do it with a Dƒ then I wouldn't be switching. I want some of the newest menu features of the current cameras, I want a camera that isn't too big, and I want great ISO performance on top of that. The Dƒ fits the bill for me.

To be honest, I barely take my D700 to shoot concerts anymore. I do everything with a Leica unless it's a soundboard shoot and I need a long telephoto.

I have 100% faith that the Dƒ will get it done for me. For others? Maybe not so much. I've been shooting musicians for over two decades. I got this.
 
Margu said:
i think the answer to my own question is a simple one. DF is designed to work with legacy nikon lenses and its 16mp sensor is going to be a lot more forgiving of those lenses. the 36mp sensor in D800 is completely unforgiven to most lenses other than the very hi-res modern ones that are designed for high mp digital sensors.
Click to expand...

In theory, but not so much in practice has been my experience.
 
From where I sit the Df sounds like the perfect camera for certain types of photography with legacy MF lenses. I would probably consider it were it not for the price. Will keep an eye out for price reductions.
 
@P. Lynn Miller: Yeah, I've written almost 2 dozen books on Nikon DSLRs, I knew exactly what I was buying. I laugh at the internet maniacs. I think most of them are just mad because they can't afford it. And in all honesty, it's cheaper than my D700 was it first came out and it's about a close to D700 as you can get (no matter what anyone wants to think).

Unfortunately, I went to the venue tonight and there was no photo pit barricade, the place was oversold because Gary Clark Jr. is a local boy who's hit it big with the blues. As much as I like him and I wanted to photograph his first show at home since he went on tour I wasn't fighting a crowd to get to the front and I only brought a 50 and a 35 so shooting from back of the house wasn't an option (it was a spec shoot so no big deal). Tomorrow I'll be shooting Trombone Shorty (New Orleans' version of our Gary Clark Jr.) maybe I'll have better luck.
 
Thanks a lot, Lynn, for these shots and the review. I have a D700 right now, and may go the Df route the day my current dSLR gives up the ghost...

But by then, who knows what models they'll have. Perhaps a digital N80 or some such quirk?

Again, thanks for the review and the photographs! :)
 
I'm on the fence about the DF, mostly concerned about its size/weight. I would have liked things like the AF from my D700 along with the 1/8000 shutter but we didn't get it so what can you do.

I used to lug around the D700 along with some fast primes to a lot of places but it got tiring after a while (I'm not a pro). I've got some fantastic gear but unfortunately it isn't getting used enough. Recently I picked up an RX1 hoping that it would bring back some inspiration/incentive to carry a camera with me and it has! It's a lot easier to throw the RX1 into your wifes purse or day bag. That said, having a tough time deciding between the A7R and DF right now. Unfortunately non of the dealers in my area have one that I can throw my primes on to play with.

My D700 has just under 7k shutter actuation's so that gives you an idea of how "light" I've been with my stuff. In fact it's currently up for sale.
 
Davewolfs said:
The one lens that I want to see on the Df is the 58mm 1.4G. It has a distinct look that to my eye is very pleasing.
Click to expand...

Yeah it does. But the $250 "kit" 50 is a steal. The price of that 58 is preeeeeety steep. Then again, if it were a Leica lens I wouldn't even blink. BUT you always know that you aren't going to lose a substantial amount with a Leica lens if you sell it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom