Not enough threads on the Df

<p>I am near a tipping point on this with only a few niggles holding me back. Would the Df gather dust while I opt for the D800E any time I care about the photos? Are the middle to high ISO shots visibly better with the Df? Or perhaps not better at all?</p>

<p>Do you really miss the 2nd card slot? I think I might, but I don't know. It has been a long time since I carried a camera with one slot. The D700 had a compact flash which was fast and with smaller files. I like to shoot RAW + JPEG.</p>

<p>Those are my two big concerns. I think I would love the controls. I like the size and the look. From a few comments I think it will be very nice for manual focus. I don't care for split-prism, so that's a plus. I don't do video...ever, so that's a plus. No wasted real-estate on the body. 1/4000 is not an issue, and I understand the shutter is quiet-ish. My D800E is like a hammer fall, but I don't mind it.</p>

<p>I would sure like to see some user comments. I read all I can find, but you know how it is when you are getting ready to get wet. I like honest impressions from people who have no ax to grind and no web ads to sell. Hope you are here. Hey, if it has been said before, that's okay. I'll read it again.</p>

<p>Pretty much everything we can say about the Df has already been posted. There are about half a dozen members here who own the Df and are vocal about it, so you'll hear the same positive comments from them.</p>

<p>Essentially you need to like the Nikon FM and F3/F4 type controls and are ok with the Multi-CAM 4800, which is a good AF system but not top of the lines as the D4 and D800.</p>

<p>When I need a smaller camera, the Df is great since it is small for FX. Having one memory card is perfectly fine 99.99% of the time, but if I shoot anything critical, I want to have two memory cards in the backup mode. I have lost critical images on one side but was saved by the second card, but that is rare.</p>

<p>P.S. I finally finished my Df review about 2 weeks ago. Still waiting for photo.net to publish it.</p>

<p>I have no axe to grind, other than I don't have one. I've wanted one since I saw it and read the specs. But my money goes to meds and doctor co-pays now. I, too, would like to read (on here) by a real user.</p>

<p>Maybe I'll win the lottery. Oh, wait! I'd have to buy a ticket.<br>

Conni</p>

<p>Just a few threads I found that might be helpful in your search but maybe you have already seen these:<br>

<a href="/reviews/nikon-df-preview/">Preview by Shun</a> <br>

<a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00cSWf">Is high High ISO on DF a bust?</a><br>

<a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00cTUA">Nikon DF mention of high ISO by Bela</a> <br>

<a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00cJvX">First experience with DF</a><br>

<a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00cCsg">Chance to shoot with a DF </a><br>

<a href="/nikon-camera-forum/00cEHf">DF low light performance</a> </p>

<p> </p>

<p><a href="http://www.fotozones.com/live/index.php/page/nikon_zone/nikon.html"><strong>In the Nikon section of the gear zone of Fotozones</strong></a>, you will find many discussion of this camera. I believe some Fotozone threads require subscription.</p>

<p>Thanks Glen. I have seen those, and some get kinda technical about higher ISO results. But I think most people get a gut impression when they look at photos, and I'm not sure it is measurable. A high ISO shot in crappy light does not equal a high ISO shot in half-decent light, but you know what it looks like with your other camera, so you know if you like it or not. The first time I looked at my photos from a D800E I was stunned, even though we all know that technically there isn't a difference comparable to what you think when you see it. People will say, "Oh, this is only 2/3 stop difference." And that means absolutely nothing to me. My gut impression of the D800E was more like 12 stops difference.</p>

<p>So I'm just wondering if when you saw that first photo from room-light, were you impressed? Did you say, "Wow"? Everyone is different, but we all compare ourselves to ourselves, and in that way you can get the the same story from people on different levels of the skill ladder.</p>

<p>Roy, if you haven't done so, find a camera store that carries the Df and hold it for a little while. At least to me, the 1970, 1980-style ergonomics and controls are the biggest drawback on the Df. However, some people do like things that way and that is why Nikon makes the retro Df to begin with; it is simply not for me. Only you can decide that for yourself.</p>

<p>I have compared ISO 6400 and 12800 on the Df vs. ISO 6400 on the D800E, downsampled back 16MP for a fair comparison. The Df is roughly half a stop better than the D800E: http://www.photo.net/photo/17736757&size=lg</p>

<p>Since the 2009 D3S, all the new FX DSLRs from Nikon have amazing high-ISO results. Recently I am using the D4S, and it is still very good at ISO 6400 and provides very decent ISO 25600 images.</p>

<p>I have a D800 and Df. I do reach for the D800 when I need tight cropping, and that is usually for macro photographs, sometimes cropped telephoto too. Other than that, the Df is fine for everything. Remember, the flagship D4 is 16Mpix too. So, resolution is generally a non-issue for me.</p>

<p>Dual card slot? I really don't care about that at all. Never had a card issue, so I guess ignorance is bliss. But does dual slots obsolete single slots? I dunno, would triple slots obsolete dual slots. It comes down to probabilities, and like I said, I never had any issue with single cards. </p>

<p>The great thing about the Df is the size/weight/handling, and the way it encourages me to take the camera with me when I head out. Get a small lens and a small bag, and make the Df your constant companion. </p>

<p>I really like the handling of the Df (at least with most "normal" sized primes) but without Multi-CAM 3500 it seems expensive for what it is. I have a similar issue with the D7100, except with that camera it is not the AF system but the buffer size that I find too small. These omissions would not prevent me from using and enjoying these cameras, but they mean that once a fix or upgrade appears that solves these problems then I would likely feel the need to upgrade, so gradually step by step the cameras would become very expensive to me (the cost of upgrades do add up). I think, where possible it is better to buy up front the right camera instead of always upgrading to fix this or that issue. I shoot quite a lot and the cost per exposure of the camera bodies is very low in my use, but still I would prefer to use the camera until they are well worn and then, maybe upgrade if technology has progressed sufficiently. This kind of upgrade every few years mentality cannot be environmentally sound. Yet it seems to be at the foundations of the operations in many industries today, to make products that last only a little while and in any case to design them so that they're not tempting to use longer than that.</p>

<p>Hector, you hit the spot with that link. I had not seen that. After reading that ongoing review by nfoto, well...I gotta have one. You can fall in love with it just reading his comments. He obviously had a positive attitude about it in the first place. Wow, great comments, and concerning stuff I care about. Thanks.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Dual card slot? I really don't care about that at all. Never had a card issue, so I guess ignorance is bliss. But does dual slots obsolete single slots? I dunno, would triple slots obsolete dual slots. It comes down to probabilities, and like I said, I never had any issue with single cards.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Dan, since my wife and I bought our first house in 1987, we have been getting home owner insurances. In some 27 years, we have paid around $20K in premium but have yet to file one claim. However, I wouldn't say such insurance is not necessary.</p>

<p>Total card failures are rare, but I have had individual image file corruptions. Today, the best practice is to duplicate your images on two cards. If you shoot anything critical, news, weddings, etc., IMO dual cards is a must. As long as you use the Df for non-critical work and things you can re-shoot, single card is a non issue.</p>

<p>Roy, it boils down to if the Df is for you and you can afford it, get it.</p>

 

<p>I read the thread by Shun but admit to not finding the others. I can check them out a few at a time now but my 'out-of-bed' time has been limited. Now I spend more time in my computer room and have been looking into my lens and camera collection and going back to thinking about what would make me happy Nikon-wise.<br>

Conni</p>

<p>Even I'm surprised we've not said enough by now. :-) I'm still having a discussion with Simon about handling (Simon: sorry, I owe you a response, I've been very busy) which in part came down to whether you found it useful to change EC every shot and how you use the camera's meter. People use their cameras differently. My suspicion is that if you look at the Df, find a control that you use a lot placed where you can't get at it, and don't think that changing your style is going to be an option, you'll have trouble. If you look at the Df and see no problems, you probably won't have any. That also applies to most reviewers - if their shooting demands are met by the Df, they may well love it; if not, they'll hate it. Still, all the niggles are just niggles. Academically, I may think they're niggles that could have been avoided (either by Nikon's design team or by the photographer using the camera differently), but it's certainly a camera that can take just as great photos as everything else on the market. If you get one, I'm sure you'll enjoy it - though I'd certainly make sure I'd tried one as much as possible beforehand, just in case.</p>

<p>I like my Df very much but it's my only DSLR so my opinion may not be valid.<br>

I like its controls and I like manual focusing with it. I never wanted the split image for MF. In the old days I swap out the standard K screen for one without the split image. The Df has all the controls I want and they way I want so it's great for me. <br>

I don't care about the dual card slot because one card is sufficient for me in term of capacity. If my card failed I would be upset as to why my equipment malfunction and would be very busy finding out the cause and not worry much about the pictures lost. I don't do photography for a living and I love the equipment just as much as my pictures. (in my regular job I really don't care about my tools. I dropped my laptop and it died I wouldn't care as I have another to continue doing my job and I have all my files backed up on the server). I just have them order me a new laptop. Not that with my cameras. If they failed I would be very sad they failed more so than miss photos. <br>

I never do video and in fact the camera without the video feature is a plus to me. I use the aperture ring whenever I can and I do feel Nikon should have provided the readout in 1/3 stop when I use the aperture ring for aperture control. I do think the camera is in fact too fat. It's fatter than the largest Nikon film SLR the F5. <br>

So the Df is for me because I like its controls and I like manual focus with it. The sensor is great but I think the sensors in other cameras are also great so it's not the deciding factor. I read many comments that people would sacrify good handling for the Df sensor. I my opinion don't. Buy the Df for the way it handles if you don't like the way it handles don't buy it.<br>

I think Nikon could put the same sensor in the D800 body and selling it for the same price as the Df. </p>

<p>I am with you on some of that BeBu. I like the equipment as much as taking the photos. I don't think I would want a Df in a D800 body. But better af is always good. I too like to use MF, but I use it mostly at work for equipment. It is the primary reason I prefer a 50mm 1.4G to a 1.8G. I think I would use it more with a Df.</p>

<p>I have pretty much decided to get one of these. I don't have to take pictures. I just like to take pictures, and I like to enjoy the camera. I recently did two weddings. Almost killed me, and I will not do another, or anything else that involves responsibility using a camera. I think I will enjoy a Df.</p>

<p>Shun, I would probably need a drive to Houston to actually see this camera, and that's a long way. But it would be nice.</p>

<p>Roy, sometimes I like the Nike slogan: just do it.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Roy, sometimes I like the Nike slogan: just do it.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I think you're right. I will.</p>

<p>Where are you Roy that you have to go to Houston to see a Df?</p>

Ha! Here I thought that -- going by the title of the thread --- lens mount of Df does not have enough turns to securely mount a lens.

<p>I lived all my life, camera with motor-drive on it, or later on, the optional battery grip or build together camera, like the Nikon F5, D2X. I get used to the extra body and felt more stable and conformable with those extras in physical form. Now, I had the Df and still struggling with the small camera on the holding side, in the main time I like the quality of the images very much what this camera can produce. All ready own a D3s and the D4. If I like to travel, move around comfortably, I grab the Df with a couple of small primes Ai, AI-S lenses, up to the 200mm f/4 AI-S. Small shoulder bag and walking around very comfortably. The Df is the best Nikon for travel and get a high quality images. It is slightly better then the D4, and half a size and weight. The build quality is pro.</p>

<p>Still hanging in there for a Df purchase late this month. The Df is a fine camera, and I actually need it to feed 8 AIS lenses. Nikon was bold to create the Df. Nikon proved they know how to get out of the box, and this is good news for whats next. I've seen the works from the DF, the Df is a performer. Go to:<a href="https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondfdlsr/"> https://www.flickr.com/groups/nikondfdlsr/</a></p>

<p>BeBu: I think you're more qualified, by using the Df as your only DSLR, at least if you've ever tried others. I'd be far more willing to put up with handling quirks on any camera (Df, X100 or $50 compact) since I have the choice to use another camera when those aren't suitable. With a Df as your main or only body, you can't just choose to use another camera, so you'll know more about working around it (and any camera requires workarounds) than many of us.<br />

<br />

But I agree that Nikon could have sold a "D800s" or "D750", or whatever you imagine calling it (D800 with a D4 sensor), in some quantities. But it costs money to keep different model lines going, so someone somewhere has to make a choice.<br />

<br />

Parv: Now, a LSM Df...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>and not worry much about the pictures lost.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I gotta say that's unbelievable. When I press the shutter, whether it's for a paid job or not, I want that picture. <br>

<br>

I'd love twin slots on my D700 for horse action sports. Those events are irreplaceable...one-offs. <br>

<br>

Some landscape views <strong><em>may</em></strong> be repeatable, but never-the-less! <br>

<br>

Lost pictures...Not a Worry! NO WAY!</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Where are you Roy that you have to go to Houston to see a Df?</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I am in Louisiana. There is or was one camera store that I know carries Nikon, but I promised him years ago that I would never again darken his door, and I haven't. I have kept an eye on bestbuy but haven't seen one there yet.<br>

<br>

But I am going to get this camera. Gotta decide on which model. I like the silver best, as I did with the FM2, but my eye-sight sucks, and the black dials look more legible.</p>