Jump to content

Nikon Introduces Df Retro DSLR


ShunCheung

Recommended Posts

<p>After 6 teaser videos: <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00c63K">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00c63K</A>,

I know it is all anticlimactic since the information has already been leaked from multiple sources. Here are the specs:</p>

<ul>

<li>16.2 CMOS sensor, similar to the one on the D4, with Expeed 3 electronics</li>

<li>ISO range from 100 to 12800, with extended range from Lo 1 (ISO 50 equivalent) to Hi 4 (ISO 204800 equivalent), same as the D4</li>

<li>Auto Focus: Mutli-CAM 4800 AF module with 39 AF points; the center 9 are cross type. Nikon uses that same AF module on the D600, D610, D7000, D5200, and D5300.</li>

<li>Memory Card: single SD</li>

<li>Metering: Spot, Center Weighted, and Matrix with 2016-pixel 3D scene recognition</li>

<li>Shutter speed: from 4 seconds to 1/4000 sec plus the B and T modes, maximum 5.5 frames/sec</li>

<li>No pop-up flash, Nikon iTTL/CLS compatible</li>

<li>Virtual Horizon: 3D</li>

<li>LCD: 3.2" and 921K dots</li>

<li>Live View: with 4×4 (16 cell) and 3×3 (9 cell) grid lines as well as16:9 and 1:1 crop lines.</li>

<li>Battery: Nikon EN-EL14a</li>

<li>No video capture capability</li>

</ul>

<p>Pricing in the US:</p>

<ul>

<li>Nikon Df, body only, in chrome or black: $2749.95</li>

<li>Nikon Df kit with the retro-style 50mm/f1.8 G AF-S lens: $2999.95</li>

<li>Retro-style 50mm/f1.8 G AF-S lens only: $279.95</li>

</ul>

<p>These marketing images are from Nikon USA. The first image should give you a good idea what their targeted audience is.</p>

<p>The Df will be a fairly low-volume, boutique product catered to collectors and a small group of affluent camera buyers. I am disappointed that Nikon doesn't put the Multi-CAM 3500 onto a $2750 DSLR, but then, a lot of those who buy the Df probably won't be using it to take pictures, at least not many of them.</p>

<center>

<p>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17584276-lg.jpg" alt="" />

</P>

<P>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17586456-lg.jpg" alt="" />

</P>

<P>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17586453-lg.jpg" alt="" />

</P>

<P>

<img src="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17586454-lg.jpg" alt="" />

</p>

</center>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 870
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

<p>Nikon Japan news article: <a href="http://nikon.com/news/2013/1105_dslr_01.htm">http://nikon.com/news/2013/1105_dslr_01.htm</a></p>

<p>DPReview has a first-look article. I am a bit surprised that they are so blunt:</p>

<blockquote>As such, although I hate to say it: from a cold, hard practical point of view, I can't shake the feeling that the Df is a little bit... silly.</blockquote>

<p><a href="http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-df/6">http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-df/6</a></p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I did have some interest in the thing as I LOVE "retro!" However, it's just not a good value for that kind of money. Too bad--they could have taken a lot of the buzz away from the new Sony by coming in well under it. I don't have the lenses for something like this, and Nikon doesn't really either, unless you want to use 1970s vintage lenses of course. I just don't see the point of buying this camera and then using 40+ yr. old lenses though. If Nikon had made this a DX version and put the D7100 AF system in it, then priced it ~$1,500, I most likely would have bought it. However, as it is, I'm going to have to pass partly because of price and partly because I just don't want to have to buy lenses for it. Wish they would make a D7100 with this styling though! I love "retro," but for this kind of money I could buy a Nikon S body and a couple of lenses and get real "retro!" It would hold its value better too. Looks like I'm SOL for doing "Pure Photography"............ Nikon could have really scored here as smaller cameras are "hot" now. I just don't know how many are going to buy this as it doesn't seem to me to be a very good value. And as I mentioned, I don't think Nikon even has lenses that are a good match. Maybe the Zeiss ZF lenses would be better suited for it?</p>

<p>Leslie--<br /> I'm almost a "hipster." I regularly use the older Leica IIIc.<br /> I'm not quite cool enough to get an M2 yet. ;-)<br>

Oh yeah--I do shoot with a Rolleiflex too.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The top dials don't fuss me too much they are still similar to a FM3A also with the ISO, expo compensation and the shutter etc. Mechanical cable release. Single SD that's all fine. I am also not that fussed with its FPS or AF s ystem either after all this is retro. Even if the price comes down and 2nd hand, it's a older Nikon F series than a FM. To me it's not one of their compact cameras for "pure" walkabout or street photography, where you can naturally snap the shot, it's a bit bulky and not that much different to the current spaceship dSLRs to me it's just retro as in skin deep. Clearly different to the Fuji's. Maybe diff target markets. Maybe Nikon is relying on its users not to ditch them due to the lenses they have invested .... and they here is a retro but not an FM but an F2/3. Rather get a used D3 in some yrs, spaceship man I am ... pairs up the D600 nicely. If I had not gotten the D600 maybe a D3 not this retro guy.</p>

<p>Edit. Also not so much about the price, it is diff and retro after all. 16MP yeah whatever that's granted too. To me it's not workable given its size, it inhibits the pureness. Seriously a bulky F2/3 to just enjoy photography and capture spontaneous moments for a non-professional guy. </p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<h2><strong>"The fusion of responsive, intuitive dial operation and 'flagship D4 image quality' in the smallest and lightest FX-format body--from the Nikon site"</strong></h2>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The retro appearance is the last thing that I am interested in. What interests me in the above blurb is reference to the <strong>"flagship D4 image quality."</strong> Being <strong>small and light</strong> sounds good, too.</p>

<p>I think that Nikon will manufacture a lot--and sell a lot. (How many is "a lot"?)</p>

<p>That is, I think Nikon hit a home run--and thus the great advertising campaign. Whether the price will drop or not very soon, I have no idea.</p>

<p>Vis-a-vis "retro," however, I do like having knobs rather than having to dig deep into menus--but the more recent Nikon DSLRs seem to have been moving in that direction anyway--to some extent.</p>

<p>I also like the HP viewfinder. I shot Canon FD from 1982 till 2006 (and before that Miranda from 1977), and I didn't miss many manual focus shots. I really like MF in many situations. I hope that there is a split-screen option built in, but I suspect that it will be offered as an option.</p>

<p>In any case, I will judge it on function and performance, not appearance, and I hope that it lives up to its "flagship D4 image quality" billing. Wish I could buy one right now, but that isn't going to happen. I don't have the money, and I like what I have. I hope that I can keep it as I grow older as a semi-retired person. It won't be easy. Buying new stuff will be very difficult.</p>

<p>The question is not what old geezers like me will buy. The question is what the younger shooters will do with it. Will they buy it? </p>

<p>They might. They just might.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I wonder what the impressions of this camera would have been without the teaser videos? So now Nikon users have a problem with D4 image quality? The camera represents styling of the past, and now its a Dud? Comments through the roof adnausium that modern DSLRs are too big to carry around, and now that Nikon makes a fix, virtually giving people what they ask for, now they don't want it? Wacked!</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Even some cell phones have more than 16 MP. My RX100-2 P&S has 20 MP.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>How well do cell phones do at high ISO in low light?</p>

<p>We know what cell phones can do. We also know what they cannot do. One thing they can't do is shoot worth a darn in near darkness.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>The difference between 16MP and 20MP is not very significant resolution wise. A great lens on 16MP sensor will make a better looking print than a less good lens on a 20-24MP camera.<br /><br /> I hope the camera succeeds in marketing, so that Nikon will release something in the future with a similar body and >36MP sensor. I also hope they rethink the front thickness and weight on future DF derivatives, with a view toward a smaller lighter body. Because the designers can do nothing to the mount register dimension and little to thin the distance between sensor and LCD screen on the back, dimensional contraction would have to come off the front of the camera, while still leaving an ergonomic grip. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Here is the official news from Nikon:<br /> http://www.nikon.com/news/2013/1105_dslr_01.htm<br /> From one point of view, if the camera is made in Japan, its homeland, that means Nikon has recovered from Fukushima tragedy and that's good news.<br>

<br /> Perhaps I will not be able to buy it although I'm considering to move from one 300s and another 300 to a 8ooE. I think I'm more tech than retro.<br>

<br /> Anyway, welcome this new model !!!</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>Well I give credit to Nikon for going out on a limb and trying something different. Of course they are going to be bashed by some, but I personally am glad to see they are at least trying something different other than adding megapixels and AF points. I don't think professional sports photographers are what Nikon had in mind with this camera. Given that a lot of the parts are from other cameras I don't think Nikon will need to sell a ton of them to make it worthwhile. I do agree that the price is a little steep however, but time and testing will eventually reveal how it performs. If I had the cash I'd love to have one for sure.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I am disappointed that Nikon doesn't put the Multi-CAM 3500 onto a $2750 DSLR</p>

</blockquote>

<p>yup. they certainly could have, without much fuss. but that's my only disappointment with this announcement, other than the price. this could be the go-to body for street/PJ/travel photographers. My D3s always looked silly with a small prime on it. when you think about it, the retro looks aid the use of older lenses and curios like the voigtlander 40/2 which would probably be a killer lens for this body.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>I think Nikon puts 16MP on the Df for good reasons. People are supposed to use those old pre-AI and AI-S lenses on it. 36MP will quickly reveal how poor a lot of those antique lenses are. 16MP is much easier on those old lenses.<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I agree that those old lenses don't hold up well when used with hi res sensors. But newer, sharper lenses are available now. 24MP (or even 36MP) would have made this a much more desirable product, IMO.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>Any manual focusing aids? Split-image, microprism collar? AF sensor bracket that illuminates when manually focused?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Fixed focusing screen according to dpreview - by the looks of it, it's exactly the same as in the D600/D610. The screen is claimed to be not replaceable, which I thoroughly hope won't be the case as this camera in particular needs that option.</p>

<p>I think it's a good sensor choice for this camera - cheapest access to the D3S/D4 performance. My main concern would be the ergonomics with that small grip and the shutter release high up on top of the camera; can't imagine this to be comfortable (never was for me with the FM/FM2/F3/FA; they all needed to be fitted with a motor drive to provide a grip and a more conveniently located shutter release). </p>

<p>If I were to purchase one (which I won't because the price is too rich for me), I would set the shutter speed dial to the 1/3 Step setting and use the main command dial. AutoISO would eliminate the need to deal with the ISO dial, and I would find a way to work with that exposure compensation dial; it's just a different way to do things - but still requires a button push and the turning of a dial. Probably couldn't do it with the camera at my eye though. That sub-command dial up front doesn't look to be too comfortable to use either. In essence, the retro style would force some adaptation in the use of the camera.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<blockquote>

<p>24MP (or even 36MP) would have made this a much more desirable product, IMO.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>ok, but if you need more MP, you can just buy a d610 or d800. i think nikon deserves kudos for finally delivering something that competes with both the new retro trend (fuji x100, olympus om-d) and FF compacts (sony a7, rx1). the limited edition 50/1.8 should have had an aperture ring, though.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>from a marketing / branding standpoint, the camera makes the rest of nikon's line look cooler. and i think the 16mp decision was a sensible one, since 24 or 36 can be overkill. of course, nikon could have come out with a retro DX camera, let's call it Coolpix Z, at $1500 with a 24/2 for $1000, at the same time, and really made a statement. after all, if you're just interested in this for the cool factor, then you dont care about FX. or, nikon could also integrate a retro-styled APS-C body with a fixed 24/2 lens and challenged fuji head-on. right now, if you're just interested in retro cool, an x100 will set you back just $750.</p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...