Nikon df or......

[Roger Hicks]

No it's not, the Sony A7 series has 100% compatibility with legacy glass, from many brands. Adapters go from prices of USD 20 onwards, maybe even less. And its 24MP or 36MP sensor is very close to the Nikon sensor (which is Sony made anyway).

The Sony's are less expensive than a Df too. Once you get past the 'Sony made crappy walkmans' sentiment, you find that the camera handles pretty good and has very good image quality.

Do they stop the aperture down automatically?

And do they have proper mirror/pentaprism viewfinders?

Isn't a top-of-the-line Sony comparable in price with a Df?

How much does a good adapter cost (e.g. Novoflex)?

All genuine questions that a quick Google didn't answer.

Cheers,

R.

 

[ajramirez]

No it's not, the Sony A7 series has 100% compatibility with legacy glass, from many brands. Adapters go from prices of USD 20 onwards, maybe even less. And its 24MP or 36MP sensor is very close to the Nikon sensor (which is Sony made anyway).

The Sony's are less expensive than a Df too. Once you get past the 'Sony made crappy walkmans' sentiment, you find that the camera handles pretty good and has very good image quality.

There is a world of difference in handling from using legacy Nikkor glass on a Df and using it on a Sony A7. Starting with the loss of the auto diaphragm.

 

[ajramirez]

Do they stop the aperture down automatically?

No.

And do they have proper mirror/pentaprism viewfinders?

Again, No.

Isn't a top-of-the-line Sony comparable in price with a Df?

The A7r II is more expensive, the A7 II is less.

How much does a good adapter cost (e.g. Novoflex)?

$254.99 USD at B&H.

All genuine questions that a quick Google didn't answer.

Cheers,

R.

Just the loss of the automatic diaphragm makes the choice a no-brainer to me.

Antonio

 

[dasuess]

There is a world of difference in handling from using legacy Nikkor glass on a Df and using it on a Sony A7. Starting with the loss of the auto diaphragm.

For my money (and yes, a Df is expensive) a Df with AI'd Nikkor glass is as close as it gets to my forty years of using that same glass on a Nikon F.

 

[ajramirez]

I think the X-T1 is a better example of a traditional SLR control layout, i.e. no PASM dial and lenses with actual aperture rings. Granted, no OVF.

I agree with you here. The problem is precisely the lack of aperture rings on modern Nikon lenses. I do not mind the PASM dial on my Df, as I leave it on A or M and shoot away.

If I had my preference, the Df would operate as does the FM3a. However, this would mean only lenses with aperture rings would be fully usable (which would exclude all modern Nikkors) and no shutter priority or program modes. I personally would not mind (all my lenses have aperture rings), but it would reduce an already niche camera to a much smaller niche.

Regards,

Antonio

 

[Rob-F]

I think it is Ken! Especially from a bricks and mortar vendor. I so hate dealing with big ticket items from ebay sooo damned risky and often SLOW.

I agree about the risks of eBay. I prefer to buy high-ticket items from one of the RFF sponsors (glad to see Setadel is now a sponsor); from RFF members; or from well known online stores like Photo Village.

 

[x-ray]

U

I agree about the risks of eBay. I prefer to buy high-ticket items from one of the RFF sponsors (glad to see Setadel is now a sponsor); from RFF members; or from well known online stores like Photo Village.

That's not without risk too. I just purchased a 50 Summicron V2 Rigid from Setadel that was described and no fungus, separation mechanically excellent and etc. the lens arrived and had major separation in the rear group, appeared to have had fungus and the focusing mount was so stiff it was very hard to focus. I've also had to return several items to KEH for obvious serious defects in glass and impact damage on Ex and Ex+ lenses and even B&H.

Granted generally the chances are better from a dealer of getting problems resolved but not always.

I found Japanese dealers to have the highest integrity. I bought a 180mm Funinon W for my 4x5 from a Japanese dealer on eBay. The lens was cosmetically near new but someone had tampered with the lens and lost vital shims and the lens was terribly soft in focus even stopped down. The dealer said don't send it back just keep it and they refunded my total charge.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Just the loss of the automatic diaphragm makes the choice a no-brainer to me.

Antonio

Thanks, Antonio. All my suspicions confirmed! As you say, not a difficult choice.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Ken Ford]

For my money (and yes, a Df is expensive) a Df with AI'd Nikkor glass is as close as it gets to my forty years of using that same glass on a Nikon F.

I completely agree! My Df is a pleasure to use with my MF Nikkors.

 

[Highway 61]

Hm. I'm not that bugged by it.

Stopping down the lens instantly shows its effect on the image (because of the EVF!) with regards to exposure and DOF.
No need for a DOF preview button and hardly any need for an exposure meter since the image itself tells you, and when in doubt you can have the histogram in the EVF to help set exposure.

My m.o. is to focus first while aperture is wide open, then stop down and set shutter speed or possibly ISO to get the lighting where I want it.

Once that is done, you effectively see the final image in the EVF so I have no need for using the rear screen to see what I shot.

Exactly.

The automatic diaphragm with a DSLR and MF focus lenses is a trap of some sort which will lead to numerous focusing errors in portrait with lenses faster than f/2.8 anyway.

Just because the factory (and not interchangeable) focusing screen is optimized for f/2.8 and darker lenses.

With f/1.4 to f/2 35mm to 85mm lenses you'll get some focus shift from f/1.4 to f/2.8 and so, many OOF photos.

So I still have to get how the Df is good enough for fast MF lenses even with the DK-17M lupe unless you turn the problem by using an aftermarket split image focusing screen or use the DOF control button for focusing at the actual aperture (so, just like what happens with a Sony and an adapter).

 

[Ken Ford]

Exactly.

The automatic diaphragm with a DSLR and MF focus lenses is a trap of some sort which will lead to numerous focusing errors in portrait with lenses faster than f/2.8 anyway.

Just because the factory (and not interchangeable) focusing screen is optimized for f/2.8 and darker lenses.

With f/1.4 to f/2 35mm to 85mm lenses you'll get some focus shift from f/1.4 to f/2.8 and so, many OOF photos.

So I still have to get how the Df is good enough for fast MF lenses even with the DK-17M lupe unless you turn the problem by using an aftermarket split image focusing screen or use the DOF control button for focusing at the actual aperture (so, just like what happens with a Sony and an adapter).

I generally only use the green dot for coarse focus when close in - if it's critical I use the ground glass. At a distance it's not an issue.

This isn't any different than with film bodies, of course - focusing aids being less accurate at full aperture isn't a new problem!

 

[ajramirez]

Exactly.

The automatic diaphragm with a DSLR and MF focus lenses is a trap of some sort which will lead to numerous focusing errors in portrait with lenses faster than f/2.8 anyway.

Just because the factory (and not interchangeable) focusing screen is optimized for f/2.8 and darker lenses.

With f/1.4 to f/2 35mm to 85mm lenses you'll get some focus shift from f/1.4 to f/2.8 and so, many OOF photos.

So I still have to get how the Df is good enough for fast MF lenses even with the DK-17M lupe unless you turn the problem by using an aftermarket split image focusing screen or use the DOF control button for focusing at the actual aperture (so, just like what happens with a Sony and an adapter).

This is only the case with lenses which suffer from focus shift from wide open, which is not the case with all, or even most, 35mm to 85mm lenses as you seem to imply. Were that the case, even folks using AF DSLRs would be getting out of focus shots, since AF phase detect systems work with the lenses wide open.

You'll also find that many (most?) mirrorless users focus with the lens wide open, and then stop down before taking the shot, as johannielscom explained in this post.

Having said that, I have no issue manual focusing even my 50mm 1.2 AIs, wide open, using the Df standard screen and the indicator dot.

Cheers,

Antonio

 

[Ken Ford]

...Having said that, I have no issue manual focusing even my 50mm 1.2 AIs, wide open, using the Df standard screen and the indicator dot...

This right here.

 

[jmanivelle]

Found a deal for a Df on eBay , loved the sensor .
Used mostly Leitaxed R and Nikon manual focus glass and had quite a lot of OOF shots even after fitting various split screen ground glasses (carefully checked these gg for focus accuracy upon installing them).
Sold the Df a few months ago with no $ loss.

Recently spotted a newlike Df in a pro shop for an unbeatable price - was told the seller was in a rush to buy LF gear.
Sticking to the original GG now w/ green dot indicator and being extra careful about my focusing.

 

[Highway 61]

Sticking to the original GG now w/ green dot indicator and being extra careful about my focusing.

Good luck.

My last portrait session with my MF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 Ai used at f/2.8, using the original focusing screen, the DK-17M lupe, the green dot indicator and being extra careful about my focusing ended up with 1 photo out of 10 which was focused like I intended to (on my model's eyeballs).

 

[sojournerphoto]

I think it's fair to say that manual focus in a fast moving environment has always been a bit of a lottery, whether with slr or rf. Zone focus and stopping down are ways around this, but low light has always been difficult.

Modern slr screens tend to be optimised for brightness rather than focus accuracy, not least because they are usually used with relatively slow (I.e. Dim) zoom lenses, rather than the 50/1.8 historic standard. This makes manual fucus even harder. Live view/EVF with focus peaking is a huge help here. Expecting a Df to be any better is

A couple of observations:

1. I picked up a pentax K1 last week and was surprised at how dim the viewfinder was - in part caused by the kit zoom on it at the time, but quite a shock after several years of exclusive rf use.

2. Last night a took a series of well exposed pictures of my wife illuminated only by her mobile phone. At iso 12800 using af on the X-Pro2 I obtained a series of in focus images. I wouldn't have been able to manually focus an slr in that light and would have struggled or been very very slow to focus a 50 wide open on an rf as well.

Increasingly I think that af cameras work best with af lenses and the best adaptor cameras are the evf bodies - X-Pro2, A7R2 and Leica sl spring to mind.

Mike

 

[Fraser]

Good luck.

My last portrait session with my MF Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 Ai used at f/2.8, using the original focusing screen, the DK-17M lupe, the green dot indicator and being extra careful about my focusing ended up with 1 photo out of 10 which was focused like I intended to (on my model's eyeballs).

It should'nt be that difficult I have no problem using the green dot same as using my old d700, use the 50mm 1.2 all the time no problem, I wonder if it makes any difference what focus mode you are using ie single point it wrap around.

 

[Fraser]

Even with a 1dx and 50mm 1.2 you may only get about 60% in perfect focus wide open if the camera is well calibrated.

 

[Gid]

The Df sensor is great indeed. it's identical to the D4, D600 and D800 but all models are optimised for different usage. The D4 for speed, the D600 for video and prosumer use, the D800 for resolution and the Df for high ISO. It's a Sony-made sensor.

For comparison purposes, one shot below was taken with a Nikon D600 & Nikkor Ai 2.0/135mm, the other with a Sony A7 & Canon FD 2.0/135mm.



Daya & Solo collage by Johan Niels Kuiper, on Flickr

The Df sensor is not the same as the D600 or D800.

 

[jsrockit]

Df sensor equals D4 sensor.