One year later, the DF: any comment?

Leicas digital M's are a far cry from the film M. It too is thicker and bulkier just like the Df and guess what you have to remove it from a tripod to replace the battery and exchange SD cards.
Not a very far cry -- in fact, the M9 is about as close as you can reasonably expect -- and besides, you don't have to take the camera off the tripod to change batteries or cards. Just leave the baseplate on the tripod. Try it!

Cheers,

R.
 
Using MF lenses isn't just about focusing. It's about . . . um . . . using MF lenses. Of course you can bodge an MF lens onto any current Nikon tub of lard, but if you want to use the lenses (and that includes AI coupling) on something faintly resembling a real camera, then I stick by what I said.
Hey Roger : all FX Nikon DSLRs have AI coupling for MF Nikkors. Ditto the old D2, D200 and D300 DX tubs of lard.

As for the rest...

If we were neighbours I would loan you my fabulous AI Nikkor 85/1.8 made in 1978 (the best MF 85mm made by Nikon ever) and you could exercise yourself at trying to get regularly tack-sharp portraits at wide apertures and close distance with the Df and its factory focusing screen. Then, in spite of the gorgeous look of that superb lens on something faintly resembling a real camera, looking at the numerous photos being front or back focused while you were certain, looking in the viewfinder, that you had focused spot on, may very well have you change your mind.
 
Using MF lenses isn't just about focusing. It's about . . . um . . . using MF lenses. Of course you can bodge an MF lens onto any current Nikon tub of lard, but if you want to use the lenses (and that includes AI coupling) on something faintly resembling a real camera, then I stick by what I said.

Cheers,

R.

Can we please clear something up here? Is the Df good for manually focusing MF lenses or isn't it? For every person who says it is, one person says it isn't. Is it determined by whether you're wearing glasses or not? Why the diametrically opposed views on this matter?

Forget about changing screens and green light focus confirmation for a minute -- is it good for focusing with MF lenses as it is without focusing assistance or isn't it? I've been dithering about purchasing one, and this aspect is an important factor in determining whether I buy one. Thanks!
 
Can we please clear something up here? Is the Df good for manually focusing MF lenses or isn't it?!

As with most things... depends.

The Df has a nice diopter adjustment that helps, but at the end of the day, it will depend on your eyesight, the light level and contrast of the subject. And the green focus dot does help a lot.

As I continue my project to scan all my 40+ years of negs and slides, I am noticing a number of focus misses, especially with wide open portrait lenses (105, 85). I am not seeing that now with the Df.

And for reference, I have worn glasses since before my interest in photography.
 
Can we please clear something up here? Is the Df good for manually focusing MF lenses or isn't it? For every person who says it is, one person says it isn't. Is it determined by whether you're wearing glasses or not? Why the diametrically opposed views on this matter?

Forget about changing screens and green light focus confirmation for a minute -- is it good for focusing with MF lenses as it is without focusing assistance or isn't it? I've been dithering about purchasing one, and this aspect is an important factor in determining whether I buy one. Thanks!
The Df has the exact same viewfinder and focusing screen as the D610.

There are severals things to consider while thinking of a DSLR viewfinder : viewfinder framing coverage, eyepoint, focusing screen.

The VF coverage is 100% (good). The magnification is below average for a camera that class. The eyepoint is too low for glasses wearers to see the entire frame at once.

All of this isn't dramatically better or worse than with old film SLRs, all things considered, yet the magnification and eyepoint aren't excellent and certainly not as good as they should be on a camera costing what it costs. Both could have been way better.

You can buy the $50 DK-17M 1.2x magnifier. Pros : bigger VF image. Cons : with it, the eyepoint will be even lower, making truly impossible to see the entire framing image and the shooting informations display at once.

Focusing screen : the camera is factory fitted with a very bright focusing screen with microlenses in it, designed for AF. As a result, when you manual focus, it's very easy to think that you're in focus while you're not, it's a matter of where the focus plane image looks to be (this has been well documented everywhere when such focusing screens began to be installed in most cameras at the end of the 1980s - look for forums threads speaking of Accute-Matte screens for the Hasselblad 500 cameras and you'll get the idea). Critical manual focusing with such screens is impossible as there are neither a Fresnel pattern nor a center split-image focusing aid.

The Df focusing screen isn't interchangeable with others made by Nikon. The camera was not marketed that way. There are now third parties screens designed for MF which you can install yourself but this will void the warranty and those screens (made off Nikon F6 or Canon screens by some Taiwan-based companies) aren't terrific.

Contraringly to what the marketing campaign told, the Df is a camera designed to be used with AF lenses.

You may think that you can rely on the electronic rangefinder green dot and arrays combo located at the bottom left of the viewfinder image but it isn't accurate enough in critical focusing situations.
 
Honestly speaking? If you really want to use manual focus lenses, please just go use a Sony A7 with an EVF really....

Either that or tripod + Live view.
 
Any better or worse than a D800/D810/D750?
Or all the same kettle of fish?

The Df has the exact same viewfinder and focusing screen as the D610.

There are severals things to consider while thinking of a DSLR viewfinder : viewfinder framing coverage, eyepoint, focusing screen.

The VF coverage is 100% (good). The magnification is below average for its cameras class. The eyepoint is too low for glasses wearers to see the entire frame at once.

All of this isn't dramatically better or worse than on old film SLRs, all things considered, yet the magnification and eyepoint aren't excellent and certainly not as good as they should be on a camera costing what iit costs. Both could have been way better.

You can buy the $50 DK-17M 1.2x magnifier. Pros : bigger VF image. Cons : with it, the eyepoint will be even lower, making truly impossible to see the entire framing image and the shooting informations display at once.

Focusing screen : the camera is factory fitted with a very bright focusing screen with microlenses in it, designed for AF. As a result, when you manual focus, it's very easy to think that you're in focus while you're not, it's a matter of where the focus plane image looks to be (this has been well documented everywhere when such focusing screens began to be installed in most cameras at the end of the 1980s - look for forums threads speaking of Accute-Matte screens for the Hasselblad 500 cameras and you'll get the idea). Critical manual focusing with such screens is impossible as there are neither a Fresnel pattern nor a center split-image focusing aid.

The Df focusing screen isn't interchangeable with others made by Nikon. The camera was not marketed that way. There are now third parties screens designed for MF which you can install yourself but this will void the warranty and those screens (made off Nikon F6 or Canon screens by some Taiwan-based companies) aren't terrific.

Contraringly to what the marketing campaign told, the Df is a camera designed to be used with AF lenses.

You may think that you can rely on the electronic rangefinder green dot and arrays combo located at the bottom left of the viewfinder image but it isn't accurate enough in critical focusing situations.
 
Vince, If possible do yourself a favor...

Take your lens(es) to a camera dealer and ask to try them on a Df. Put in your own SD card - takes some snaps in various lighting conditions. Then take your card home, load it on your computer and examine the images. Then decide if a Df is in your future. That's what I did...

And if you're a MF guy like me, don't waste money on the kit AF lens. I have yet to use mine.
 
Vince, If possible do yourself a favor...

Take your lens(es) to a camera dealer and ask to try them on a Df. Put in your own SD card - takes some snaps in various lighting conditions. Then take your card home, load it on your computer and examine the images. Then decide if a Df is in your future. That's what I did...

And if you're a MF guy like me, don't waste money on the kit AF lens. I have yet to use mine.

Yes, I should probably do that (though I currently don't have any old Nikon lenses). I think Service Photo in Baltimore stocks the Df, and likely has some Ai lenses in their used inventory. And yes, I was thinking of just getting the body -- Adorama has some refurbs on sale for $2295, or I may just wait until they get under $2k in the secondary market. We'll see.
 
Hi Vince

Bought a Df a while back. I have 2 lenses for it. the old mf 50mm 1.2 and the new af zoom 24-70mm zoom. Could not be happier, but... it is my first dslr, nothing to compare it with. It serves a purpose that the M9 does not.

There is no perfect camera...but there are nice ones out there.
h.
 
Hi Vince

Bought a Df a while back. I have 2 lenses for it. the old mf 50mm 1.2 and the new af zoom 24-70mm zoom. Could not be happier, but... it is my first dslr, nothing to comare it with. It serves a purpose that the M9 does not.

There is no perfect camera...but there are nice ones out there.

h.
Too many people seem unable to understand this simple truth.

Cheers,

R.
 
Too many people seem unable to understand this simple truth.

Cheers,

R.


But there is a perfect camera .... it's a digital RF that becomes the world's most expensive mirrorless with an EVF mounted in the hot shoe and an adapter for your favourite SLR lenses. 😀
 
Just used Simple DOF to calculate what a 1.2/50mm lens on the Df would do.

Wide open focused at 50cms distance, you'll get 0.6cm DOF and I can imagine that is hard to focus. Wide open focused at 350cms though, you'll get 34.55cm DOF and I'd say that is already pretty hard to mis-focus, unless your object is moving. Add the increased ISO range to it and it's pretty easy to stop down to 2.8, which will leave you with a DOF of 83.11cm at 350cms distance.

I'm thinking that those who consider the manual focusing hard to do, are maybe pixel peeping beyond the requirements of a photographer who is using the camera professionally?
 
Leicas digital M's are a far cry from the film M. It too is thicker and bulkier
This is true. And it is also of absolutely no relevance to me. I like my M3 and I like my M240. They are both excellent cameras, I enjoy using both of them, and the additional thickness and weight of the M240 just doesn't bother me. At all. Apparently, though, it bugs the living, um, whatever, out of some people. I don't get it because I find their similarities in use much more important than the differences (excluding, of course, the film/digital thing).

Then again, I really like my Hexar RFs so what would I know? Perhaps I'm just not pure enough.

...Mike
 
Back
Top Bottom