Nikon Df Review at dpreview

jonmanjiro said:
Oh I don't know about that. I bet Nikon thinks they can sell quite a few of these... and surprise surprise the Df is sold out in Japan.
Click to expand...

Because they only made a few.... but they have to be making a much higher margin per body at that price so it's a nice profit all the same.

As for the arguments about people being mean or not liking the DF... it's the internet and we're discussing camera gear. How boring it would be if everyone was in agreement and OMG those pixels hurt my self-esteem.
 
Frank Petronio said:
Because they only made a few.... but they have to be making a much higher margin per body at that price so it's a nice profit all the same.
Click to expand...

You make it sound like Nikon already stopped making them. Sendai Nikon is churning out 15,000 per month and expects to be behind on orders for six months or more.
 
JSU said:
While the Df isn't, per se, a slap in the face from Nikon, I still feel increasingly disappointed with Nikon.

Coincidental to the 2008 Olympics, Nikon brought out the D3. It's story is very well known and its place in camera history is well secure. Nikon soon followed with the D700, a prosumer version of the D3. Same sensor in a somewhat stripped down body. And importantly, the option of an accessory battery pack allowing use of the D3 battery to achieve almost the same cycling rate of the D3.

Nikon subsequently updates with the D3S, but no update for the D700.

Nikon brings out the D4, still no update of the D700.

Nikon puts the D4 sensor in the Df body which to some is received as a cruel joke on the part of Nikon.

A personal slap in the face, . . . no, but a source of continued frustration and disappointment, very much so.

I have mentally brainstormed a D700 replacement, often. A D700S might have had the sensor of the D3S. Then came the D4 and increased resolution, wouldn't that be a cool sensor in the D700 frame.

Instead, Nikon offers the Df, take it or leave it.

:bang:

🙁
Click to expand...

Nikon is a corporation. Inherently the goal of all corporations is to make money while pleasing the largest amount of consumers it can.

When Nikon made the D3 they stepped on their own foot by making the D700 so close in specs. Many pros, myself included bought the D700 instead of the D3 saving a bundle of cash. Nikon doesn't see me saving money they view it as them losing money.

The D3 update to the D3s was in direct response to their own marketing snafu. The had to put a larger gap between the D700 and the flagship model. That is why they never made a D700s. They didn't want to screw themselves over again.

They will never put a pro sensor in a semi-pro body again. Nikon wants the pros to spend the money on the pro cameras. The D700 was a fluke. You can't sit around crying about them not reproducing what in their bean counters eyes was a pretty big screw up. Yes they sold a lot D700s, but probably 50% of those sales would have went to a D3 had the specs not been so close.

Personally I would be unbelievably excited if Nikon had put the D4 sensor in the D800 body. But I know it's not going to happen. Taking to the internet forums and crying about how Nikon let you down is pointless. Nikon is in the business of making cameras for profit and will continue to practice the marketing strategy that makes them the highest profit margin possible.
 
rivercityrocker said:
They will never put a pro sensor in a semi-pro body again. Nikon wants the pros to spend the money on the pro cameras. The D700 was a fluke. You can't sit around crying about them not reproducing what in their bean counters eyes was a pretty big screw up. Yes they sold a lot D700s, but probably 50% of those sales would have went to a D3 had the specs not been so close.
Click to expand...

That's silly because a lot of people would have simply bought Canon 5D2s or some other competitive camera. Or stuck with their older cameras as many of us are doing during this drought of sensible Nikon bodies and decent quality control....

Nikon may be a corporation out to make money but they are not doing too good a job of it lately. Check out the Thom Hogan numbers.
 
I'm waiting to hear from Bjorn Rorslett before I make a final decision to buy or not. I actually like the way the camera looks and the D4 sensor is a big step up from my D700. But I really want to know what the deal is with the viewfinder and using MF lenses.
 
I don't think nikon or canon is doing anything bad for not updating the digital camera as often. high-end would not make a difference over 20mp file. fashion houses are using digital back, press photo for any news print or web publishing are more than enough spec. i am happy with D700 but I rarely use it because I am keen on rf. I think paying more than 2k for a FF digital camera these days are nuts. can anyone really tell the picture?
 
Back to the review

Back to the review

They didn't like the live view. Actually it's great, you can zoom right in on a focus point with one click, it's crystal clear, it doesn't blur or flicker. You can get exposure preview, just press the DOF preview button (in live view it reflects changes in shutter speed, iso & aperture) I've worked with, D70, D200, D300, D3, D3s & D800. Best live view so far!
Also best awb so far, first camera I've not used k setting at all times.
AF works fine. To use the D800 module body would have to have been deeper, I'll take the small size thanks.
Grip is small, um it's a small camera, that's why I bought it.

Gripes? One, I don't like only being able to adjust aperture in third stops with a G lens attached. I want the option of half or whole stops on that dial. It is an annoyance, hopefully they will fix it.

Like most people who have one, I love it 🙂
 
Frank Petronio said:
That's silly because a lot of people would have simply bought Canon 5D2s or some other competitive camera. Or stuck with their older cameras as many of us are doing during this drought of sensible Nikon bodies and decent quality control....

Nikon may be a corporation out to make money but they are not doing too good a job of it lately. Check out the Thom Hogan numbers.
Click to expand...

I think you know that people heavily invested in Nikon lenses don't just "simply buy a Canon 5DII".

Thom Hogan is an old blowhard. I get so sick of people referring to him as if he knows everything. Does that guy even shoot pictures?
 
JSU said:
How much revenue is Nikon losing with not selling me any camera, at all?

FYI, I have owned two D3 bodies and a D3S body. Sold all because from an ergonomic view, all were too big, for my daily use. Not so for the D700.

Taking to the internet and raving how wonderful is the Df is equally pointless, Nikon already has your money.

Frank Petronio hit an interesting point. I was issued an original 5D, pretty much wore it out in 3 years time. I now personally own a pair of 5D2 bodies, primarily as a digital solution for my OM lenses. I didn't actually sell my D3S, I traded it to another sports shooter who had a new 5D3 w/grip and a pair of batteries. It was a fair trade for both of us.

The 5D3 is just enough more than its predecessors to really interest me, not only for my OM lenses, but also for adapting several of my MF Nikkors to it. I have already done a MLB game with the 5D3 and my Nikon 400/3.5, better IQ than the D700 which isn't a surprise, and the larger files than the D3S is also a plus.
Click to expand...

Where do you see me "raving" how wonderful it is? Because if you read for content everything that I point out is what works for me. And I've also pointed out the faulty AF system is a downfall for me. How is that "raving"? I'm giving an objective view on how the camera works for me.

You're sitting around all butt-hurt that Nikon hasn't appeased you by making you exactly what you want. Guess what? The Dƒ isn'texactly what I want either, but it's close enough.

So you got a 5D3. That's great. If Canon makes the camera you need then buy it. You have a choice.
 
JSU said:
I have: Nikon AF: 24/2.8, 180/2.8, 24-85/2.8-4, 70-300/5.6 VR, MF (all AI): 24/2, 55/2.8 Micro, 55/1.2, 105/2.5, 300/4.5 IF-ED, 400/3.5 IF-ED & 500/4 P IF-ED.

How much more would I need to qualify as heavily invested?

As I previously noted, I have bought not one, but two 5D2 bodies and swapped (even) a D3S for a 5D3 with grip & batteries.
Click to expand...

While your lens collection is nice it's not comparable to owning the 14-24/24-70/70-200 f/2.8 trinity along with a 300mm f/2.8G, 35mm f/1.4G, 85mm f/1.4G, 24mm f/1.8G.

You've got a good stable of economical glass. But it's not in excess of $10K worth of lenses.
 
wjlapier said:
I'm waiting to hear from Bjorn Rorslett before I make a final decision to buy or not. I actually like the way the camera looks and the D4 sensor is a big step up from my D700. But I really want to know what the deal is with the viewfinder and using MF lenses.
Click to expand...

My experience is that it's no different than any of the other current Nikons. Some people have been reporting that it's better, but I think it's a placebo effect.
 
Thom Hogan isn't a great photographer. I don't think any of the photobloggers are. If they were better photographers then they would be such gearheads, would they?

However... the old blowhard has worked in technology marketing for most of his life and if look back over the past ten years of his articles, he's been spot on most of the time. When it comes down to the marketing analysis he's been proven right time after time... and he hardly cuts Nikon slack on any of their foul-ups. He's invested in Nikon but he doesn't seem to pull any punches when it comes to railing on them so I tend to think he is pretty straight and honest.

So yeah I probably wouldn't go looking for photo-making advice from the guy but if I were Nikon I'd certainly be listening to his product advice far more than any other American voice on the internet.
 
Frank Petronio said:
Thom Hogan isn't a great photographer. I don't think any of the photobloggers are. If they were better photographers then they would be such gearheads, would they?

However... the old blowhard has worked in technology marketing for most of his life and if look back over the past ten years of his articles, he's been spot on most of the time. When it comes down to the marketing analysis he's been proven right time after time... and he hardly cuts Nikon slack on any of their foul-ups. He's invested in Nikon but he doesn't seem to pull any punches when it comes to railing on them so I tend to think he is pretty straight and honest.

So yeah I probably wouldn't go looking for photo-making advice from the guy but if I were Nikon I'd certainly be listening to his product advice far more than any other American voice on the internet.
Click to expand...

I don't think that to be a gearhead means that you inherently are bad photographer. I'm a gearhead because it's part of my job, but I also pride myself on my ability as a photographer.

As far as marketing analysis goes, I don't disagree with the fact that if Nikon would make a D700 replacement (ie. D4 in a D800 body) that they would sell a ****-ton of cameras. But the fact remains that Nikon hasn't done so and there's no indication that they will do so.

Thom Hogan is just one voice out there. I'm sure Nikon employs LOTS of highly qualified people to analyze their marketing strategies. I know that camera forum lurkers would like to believe that they are the voice of the market but the cold hard truth is that camera nerds are but a tiny drop in the bucket. The market is not driven by the wannabe elitists than go over every feature with a fine-tooth comb. It's driven by people that just want to make good pictures and about 90% of those people never come to sites like this or DPReview or whatever other camera forums because they don't care about the minutiae.

Edit: I'm not defending Nikon's decisions by the way. I think they could do better. But I don't expect to change them. I'm not a Nikon fanboy or rep. I'm just looking at it pragmatically. What can I possibly do to change Nikon? Nothing.
 
rivercityrocker said:
The market is not driven by the wannabe elitists than go over every feature with a fine-tooth comb. It's driven by people that just want to make good pictures and about 90% of those people never come to sites like this or DPReview or whatever other camera forums because they don't care about the minutiae.
Click to expand...
Those people now take photos with smartphones or, best case, a compact digicam. If they're the group target the highly qualified people (those who get paid by Nikon to analyze their marketing strategies) thought of when the Df was on the working bench, then I'm Pope Francesco ! 😀
 
wjlapier said:
I'm waiting to hear from Bjorn Rorslett before I make a final decision to buy or not. I actually like the way the camera looks and the D4 sensor is a big step up from my D700. But I really want to know what the deal is with the viewfinder and using MF lenses.
Click to expand...

He has answered that pretty definitively on NikonGear.
 
Oh man, the hate this camera has inspired is beyond hilarious. It reminds me of that Christmas story a few years ago where this engineer turned up to a Christmas party with some kind of home made flame thrower trying to incinerate everyone. The flames keep spewwing but it's just burning the owner...

Anyways, I sold my D800 to buy one. The internet seems to "know" why I bought one already, but it's really because I wanted one, and I wanted a lower MP count in a non-rubber wrapped monstrosity. Broke even too!

So far it's cool, it goes well with the new 1.8G primes. Bit unbalanced with the 35mm f1.4G, hoping to get the rumored 35mm f1.8G to replace it, would be perfect. The 85mm f1.8G, 50mm f1.4G & 28mm f1.8G all balance great.

So far I've put an old Nippon Kogaku 10.5cm f2.5 1960's lens on. Worked fantastic! The blur & single coat on the lens give it a great feel wide open for portraits & bw. Surprisingly sharp too, I could easily see myself using this for headshots. Here's a shot from it the other day, just normal LR adjustments


DSC_2626 by Tim Power, on Flickr

Focus is by eye, that little rangefinder icon is too small to see I think. My eye sights pretty good, if you wear glasses or your eye sights not that great I think it might be hard to MF well. Live view is good for this but much slower. I could see myself getting used to it.

I have to admit, I pulled the trigger on some more non-AI glass after using the 10.5cm, a 35mm f2 70's with multi coat, and a 55mm f1.2 are on their way. It'll be fun to have a run around with some old primes I think, I'd like to try something different instead of using the same AF lenses all the time.

Overall, am I happy? I would say so. I don't feel ripped off, or outraged by the price. I paid less for the Df at retail than I did for my d700 & d800. I feel like every year the internet is getting a little worse for this hobby...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MP Guy
Do you like a good tease ?
Replies
0
Views
314
MP Guy
MP Guy
A
Light Lens Lab - 35mm f1.4 Aspherical now in production
2
Replies
26
Views
2K
Freakscene
Freakscene
MP Guy
Write a review and the questions never stop coming. What say you ...
Replies
1
Views
218
peterm1
peterm1
H
Nikon Defocus Control
Replies
0
Views
826
Harry the K
H
Disappointed_Horse
Nikon Close-Up Filters
Replies
16
Views
605
phofseth
P
Back
Top Bottom