Nikon Df

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I would think that one should not buy the Df if they want the D4 but want to save money. It's not the D4 for half the price. One should not buy the Df either if you want a big grip or the vertical grip. </p>

 

[dan_brown4]

A power grip is the antithesis of what the Df is. So is an ARCA L-plate.

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Maybe I've failed to buy into the "vision" of the Df, but I don't think of it with the kind of reverence that I do some exotic items (like a 6mm or a 1200-1700mm). So I wouldn't rule out a grip just because it doesn't buy into the Df's ethos (if that's what Dan is saying) - we can use our cameras how we like, no matter what Nikon may have expected. But I do think there are practical issues in putting a vertical grip on a Df, more so than other DSLRs. And I'm sympathetic with what I assume is Dan's point: most people wanting a Df are likely to want one either because it handles like an F3 (sort of), or at least because it's light. Add a grip, and maybe the Df wasn't the right starting point.<br />

<br />

Not that everyone wanting a Df cares about the body - I don't think Roy is alone in wanting the sensor, and to be honest, I'd not mind it either. (I was out shooting with my D700 yesterday and I could have done with better performance at ISO 1600 in a light body that wasn't too demanding on pixels. But it's not <i>that</i> much better than the D610/D800 sensor.) However, the discussion about whether the Df is the right body for Nikon to have put the D4's sensor into has been had before, and in many places. :-)<br />

<br />

In any case, good collection, Bela. :-) I had to take my 135 f/2.8 AI-S off my D700 before I went shooting with it yesterday (I needed a zoom) otherwise I'd feel more in the mood of the thread.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>While of course anyone can want to try to put a grip on the DF if they want, I think I agree with Dan that that is missing the point of what the DF is trying to be, and why the DF is excellent at what it does. It would be a bit like looking at say a Leica M9 and trying to put a battery grip on that - it may be that someone somewhere might want to do that for some reason, and that reason may be perfectly legitimate, but it's not what the camera is about.<br>

Personally, I hate battery grips, and can't imagine why anyone would want to put one on any camera, except perhaps to make the camera look more expensive. The weight and bulk and inconvenience of the built-in second hand grip is one of the main disadvantages of the likes of the D4 etc., and its absence is one of the DF's (and for that matter the D700, D800's etc.) biggest advantages. I accept that other people may have a different view. But the chances are a Nikon DF or a Leica M9 or a Fuji x100 are probably not going to be the right camera for that person.</p>

 

[bebu_lamar]

<p>I agree with Dan and Simon but that guy Kai Wong can hold the M9 but not the Df. Or actually he can't hold either but he doesn't complain about the M9. He called the Df a dismal failure.<br>

I think the sensor in the Df is good but not really better than the 600 or 800. I think one can resize image from those cameras and reduce noise. I would not buy the Df for its sensor alone. I would prefer the Df sensor but I would still buy it if it has the D600 sensor in it. I buy it for the shutter speed dial and I accept the small grip and wish it has no grip at all. </p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>So where's this Kai Wong article? He seems to be the guy behind Digitalrev. I'd like to see not only the article but also some evidence that he's absolutely brilliant at taking pictures, not just marketing them, before taking whatever he said seriously. There has been soooooooo much nonsense spoken about the DF, my presumption until proven otherwise is that he'll just be jumping on the bandwagon to get some publicity.</p>

<p>The reports from good professionals that I've read have been extremely positive. My experience has been extremely positive - I honestly think it is the best digital camera produces so far. It's problem has probably been that it is innovative, and reviewers are on the whole conservative, especially when they've just invested a fortune in and have an emotional attachment to a D800 or whatever.<br /> <br />The DF <em>really</em> isn't hard to hold. Not for someone who has fingers and thumbs and one or two brain cells. It's not too heavy, and a good shape. It's certainly not harder to hold than a D700 (the DF is lighter which makes it easier, but slightly less rubbery, which means it can be slightly slippier until you get used to it, one tiny thing to watch out for, no biggie). </p>

 

[bebu_lamar]

<p>It's the video here!<br>

Watch how he hold the camera.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I agree with Dan and Simon but that guy Kai Wong can hold the M9 but not the Df. Or actually he can't hold either but he doesn't complain about the M9. He called the Df a dismal failure.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Kai Wong is indeed one of the guys behind DigitalRev. He is based in Hong Kong and speaks with some sorts of British accent. When I grew up there in the 1970's, it was still a British colony, until 1997.</p>

<p>I am not surprised that someone can hold the Leica M9 without any problems but dislikes the Df. Again, the difference is in the lenses. If you mount an f1.8 AF-S lens such as the 28mm, 50mm, or 85mm, or even the fairly heavy Sigma 35mm/f1.4 on the Df, the small grip is not much of a issue. However, as I said earlier, if you mount a 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR onto the Df and hold the combo only with your right hand, that tiny grip on the Df is going to put a lot of pressure on your finger tips due to the overall weight of the combo.</p>

<p>In contrast, those Leica M lenses are tiny. For example, I have the 40mm/f2 Summicron. See how tiny it is next to the 50mm/f1.8 AF-S. It is about the size of the Nikon 1 10mm/f2.8 wide.</p>

<p>Here is a link to DigitalRev's Nikon Df review on YouTube: <a href="

I am no fan of the Df myself, but Kai Wong totally trashes it in that video review to the extreme. I watch that video with interest mainly because of the street scenes in the Hong Kong Central District, not the review itself.</p>

<p>However, I think it is fair to say that the Df is a niche product that has appeal to a fairly small group of people, which is quite apparent even on this very thread.</p><div></div>

[simon_crofts]

<blockquote>

<p>if you mount a 70-200mm/f2.8 AF-S VR onto the Df and hold the combo only with your right hand, that tiny grip on the Df is going to put a lot of pressure on your finger tips due to the overall weight of the combo. In contrast, those Leica M lenses are tiny.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I'd love to see him try to get a 70-200mm on a Leica M9 and see how he gets on. Of course, it's a huge disadvantage of the Leica M9 that it can't take those kinds of lenses.</p>

<p>I disagree about the DF being a niche product - it is only the silly gear-head reviews like that one linked to that make people think it should be so. But the DF - if you start to look at reviews by actual photographers, you get a different story. There is a series of reviews by professional photographers who actually know what they're talking about on this site: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/?s=Nikon+df&searchsubmit= which are much more interesting.</p>

 

[borgis_karl_johan1]

<p>Holding a DF or any other DSLR and a 70-200 mm f2,8 zoom with ONE hand seems like an absurd proposition, except in some exotic circumstance that I find hard to imagine. Valid arguments please.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>The 70-200 is a highly niche product in any case - I doubt many people would be using one on a DF. It's nice to know that it's possible if necessary, but hardly a way to judge the camera, and for the few people for who using a 70-200 regularly (horrible lens for most purposes) is a priority, they'll probably be using a different camera anyway.</p>

<p>It's a bit like judging, say, a D4 according to whether it's good as a point-and-shoot and fits in a handbag. It's just about possible to do, but not what the design is intended to achieve.</p>

 

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Holding a DF or any other DSLR and a 70-200 mm f2,8 zoom with ONE hand seems like an absurd proposition, except in some exotic circumstance that I find hard to imagine. Valid arguments please.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Why?</p>

<p>I didn't say you should be taking pictures with a 70-200mm/f2.8 on a DSLR while holding that combo only your right hand. If I am taking pictures, I would use a tripod or use my left hand to support the bottom of the camera (or the lens if it is a long lens).</p>

<p>However, I could still be holding the combo with only my right hand while I need to pick up another lens from the bag with my left hand or mount a flash with my left hand .... Just because I am not shooting, the weight of the combo is still there and due to the Df's small grip, you may feel that it is going to slip away from your right hand.</p>

<p>Additionally, while I don't do that very often, I have taken pictures holding the camera only with my right hand and I hold a flash with my left hand, away from the camera. Once again, having a proper grip on the camera body makes life much easier.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<blockquote>

<p>However, I could still be holding the combo with only my right hand while I need to pick up another lens from the bag with my left hand or mount a flash with my left hand .... Just because I am not shooting, the weight of the combo is still there and due to the Df's small grip, you may feel that it is going to slip away from your right hand.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's what I'm doing all the time - changing lenses hundreds of times a night. The DF is a lot lighter than the D700 I had before, so a lot easier generally in handling for this kind of thing. Of course, you have a camera strap too so if you do let go of the camera for a moment or two, it's not a problem. </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Additionally, while I don't do that very often, I have taken pictures holding the camera only with my right hand and I hold a flash with my left hand, away from the camera. Once again, having a proper grip on the camera body makes life much easier.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Camera grips = extra weight and make handling the camera one-handed more tiring. I often do this with my D700 + off camera flash, and the DF is easier. What isn't easier in this case on the DF is the exposure compensation - which requires left hand. The DF isn't absolutely perfect in every situation - it's just a huge improvement in most circumstances on what we already have.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Borgis, holding a DSLR and a 70-200 one-handed is, indeed, absurd. Unfortunately, unless you're using a tripod or you're Zaphod Beeblebrox, you're going to have trouble holding a Df and 70-200 one-handed while still being able to change ISO or exposure compensation (though Zaphod would also be able to look through the finder while still being able to see the dials). If you only ever use the Df like a film camera - changing ISO only every now and again - then it's not an issue. That's not how I shoot: one advantage of DSLRs is that you can change ISO on a per-shot basis.<br />

<br />

If the Df could be fully controlled with one hand on the grip like the rest of Nikon's range (slight grumbles about the ISO button location aside), it wouldn't matter that the grip isn't very supportive. If you use it with a small lens, the grip is good enough, allowing you to move the left hand to the necessary controls. But, in my brief experience (and I've not spent several months with a camera that I found - for me - unconvincing in a few minutes) the Df's configuration doesn't work well with big lenses. I'm very happy to be told otherwise by someone with more experience: I'd love a D4 sensor in a cheap(er) body if I thought it would work for me.<br />

<br />

Holding the Df on its own, or with a small lens, is comfortable enough - I'm not 100% convinced by all the choices, but nothing massively gets in the way. It obviously works, just as the interface changes of the F5 didn't mean an F4 was impossible to use. I've stated that I'd quite like an X100s, and I own a Bessa R which is just as dial-based as the Df - with much less of a grip. If all your lenses are reasonably small, and it appears that Bela's are, I'm happy that a Df is a perfectly good camera choice, if you prefer it. (I do think it's slightly slower to use than a more modern design, but not much.) I'd love a Leica M (240 or Monochrom, I'm not fussy if someone is offering), but I've no delusion that pairing one with a 70-200 is a good idea.<br />

<br />

I've been vocal about the Df partly because I wanted to understand it, and partly because I'm concerned that, just because a camera looks reassuringly familiar to someone who grew up on an F3, it doesn't mean that's the best camera design for them to use. I worry that the Df has the potential to get a lot of emotional, rather than rational, sales; that doesn't mean that I believe there are no rational reasons to want a Df, or that everyone who is happy with the Df is deluding themselves. And there are certainly reviewers who find the Df doesn't suit them and can't imagine how it could suit anyone else. Let's keep the arguments valid on both sides.</p>

[nikofile]

<blockquote>

<p>However, I could still be holding the combo with only my right hand while I need to pick up another lens from the bag with my left hand or mount a flash with my left hand .... Just because I am not shooting, the weight of the combo is still there and due to the Df's small grip, you may feel that it is going to slip away from your right hand.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Good point. In a working situation there are all sorts of instances where one might do this. I certainly understand that a street shooter or even a landscape shooter might not care about this. If I were taking family photos, I wouldn't care either. Those are the kinds of situations where I would love to have this camera. But I cannot afford a camera that can't serve as a working backup. After a lot of reading I have decided against it. I think my choices for a backup are really a D4/D3s, another D800E, or the D600 I already have. My D600 is hardly broken in, and it has already earned its keep as a backup. It saw a lot of use at two weddings, and to my surprise the AF system has performed extremely well. Image quality is great as well. Thinking about it, the D600 makes this NOT a time critical decision, so I am going to stay with it for now. If by some miracle I fall into a pile of money, maybe I will give that D4 another look.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>I'm using it at the moment with a 105mm VR lens which weighs 751 grammes, and it's perfectly balanced - I can hold the camera and access exposure compensation with the camera raised to my eye without moving my hands and it's perfectly comfortable. A 24-70mm f2.8 isn't that much heavier and I don't think that is fundamentally going to change. Though I don't think the 24-70mm is the right lens for this camera, these heavy slow zoom lenses are not what this nimble and fast camera is about.</p>

<p>If you really need to use a 70-200mm lens, or something longer like a 500mm f4 for motorsports etc. very regularly with it as a core lens, you might think about something else. But that will be a tiny minority of people.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I do think it's slightly slower to use than a more modern design, but not much.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The mistake is not to think it is a modern design, it's pretty much cutting edge. The F5-based designs are dated, it's time to move on.</p>

<p>The DF is on the whole faster and easier to use than, say, a D800, which is one of the reasons why it's getting a good reception among many professionals who can't afford to be emotional about the tool. Personally, my income depends on getting the right tool for the job, it's what I spend my life doing, so I can't afford to be starry-eyed about it.</p>

 

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Thanks for the feedback on the handling with the 105mm, Simon. I have a 90mm Tamron, and I imagine it would be equally fine. The 14-24 is a 1kg lens and quite front-heavy (this is what I actually tried on the Df); my 150mm Sigma, 70-200, and big primes would suffer - and I do use them a lot. I may well be a minority. I suspect an 85 f/1.4 would be a bit uncomfortable, and that may well be the borderline.<br />

<br />

Let's agree to differ on what's "modern". I can see how it's possible to use a Df without it getting significantly in the way. I can also see that the F5 design was introduced to keep the photographer's hands on the shutter and allow fast aperture control with hand-held long lenses (where reaching the aperture ring is a problem). There are specific handling issues with the Df which are not present on other Nikons, and, while I'm happy to accept that some might like the way the handling works, it's very hard to argue that a design which requires you to take your hands off the shutter to change controls is definitively going to replace the existing system.<br />

<br />

There are pros using Leica M bodies and 5x4 cameras. I'd love to be doing the same as an amateur. They solve specific photographic problems, and the Df partly solves similar problems. It also fails to solve a number of problems that other cameras fix. Depending on the problems you face, I'm sure the Df might be the right tool for the job; it's just asserting that it might be a better tool <i>on average</i> than a conventional camera that gives me pause. I'd love to be emotional about liking the Df, but I've come to believe it really doesn't make sense for me. If I have emotions about it, it's frustration that Nikon might have been able to make a camera that more people would apparently have wanted to buy. Not that it's any skin off my nose - while there's plenty I'd like to fix, my D800 does me nicely.<br />

<br />

[Edit: Apologies - despite attempting to be level-headed about this, this is in danger of turning into another Garrard/Df rant thread. I'll back off in the interests of everyone's sanity, including my own limited amount. I'm glad there are happy Df owners; everyone else should make up their own minds.]</p>

[simon_crofts]

<blockquote>

<p>There are specific handling issues with the Df which are not present on other Nikon</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>The DF has 'has handling issues' in the sense that it is a huge improvement. I've been fighting with first the D2x and second the D700 for about 8 years now, and the handling was not very good. The DF isn't perfect, but it's cured a lot of the problems - at least it's a step in the right direction. I think most of the little niggles can be sorted out by a firmware update. It's still a big step forward.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>it's very hard to argue that a design which requires you to take your hands off the shutter to change controls is definitively going to replace the existing system</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But it doesn't require you to take hands off the shutter, unless you're trying to do something obscure that I haven't come across. I think it's possible that your trial in the shop didn't amount to a proper workout of the camera. You have to use the camera in a slightly different way from D700's etc. - including a slightly different hand grip. But you get used to it after a few hours. Which is more than I can say for the D2x/D800 after 8 years...</p>

<p>The only main control where it is easier to take your hand away from the shutter is ISO control - but this was the case with the D700 too for that matter. You can change ISO control on either DF or D700 with the camera at eye level, but it's easier to do it while looking down at the camera in both cases. But the DF has an excellent auto ISO control, so in that respect it's an improvement. And the ISO dial is nice and clear, also an improvement, even though you may not want to use it at eye level.</p>

<p>The main thing that worried me before I bought the camera was how easy it would be to use exposure compensation with camera at the eye, because I was using easy exposure compensation on the D700 - which was one of the few aspects of that design that worked well. And I'm using exposure compensation constantly, from frame to frame. I've found that I can do it on the DF pretty much as quickly and easily as on the D700. It does take two hands, so might be awkward with something really heavy like a 70-200mm, but that really is a detail for a niche lens. Like I said, the camera isn't 100% perfect, it's just much better than anything else around for most uses.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>BTW, don't get me wrong, I loved my D700 (both of them) to bits, it's a wonderful camera, a classic, one of the best. It's just the controls/handling which were always its Achilles heel. Camera design has to move on.</p>

 

[dan_brown4]

<p>I note the comparison to the F3, since the Df has a grip bulge on the front similar to the F3. However, I think the F3 is the wrong Nikon to reference. Even though we want to pick a certain professional model since the Df is such a fine picture-taking instrument, I think the best film body comparison is the FG, or even the EM. Compact, lightweight, and efficient. </p>

[simon_crofts]

<p>BTW one of the pleasant surprises about the DF was the autofocus, which I didn't have high hopes for when I bought it. While no doubt the likes of the D4 will be superior (and it would be nice if the autofocus area was bigger on the DF), it was far more capable than I had imagined.</p>

<p>I christened the DF by photographing a (mostly) very low light and fast moving ballet performance. It was locking on and focussing consistently and fast even in the kind of very dim light where my D700 struggles on the D700 I would normally have to switch to manual focus quit a bit of the time. The 105mm lens in particular does a lot of 'hunting' on the D700. On the DF I didn't notice it doing that at all. It focussed crisply and consistently and tracked nicely. There were a couple of times it didn't focus, but only when it was so dark I could barely see the subject with my eyes.</p>

<p>I just wish I had the DF a couple of weeks earlier when I was taking pictures of a Russian national ballet company. Not only because of its higher ISO-capable sensor, but also because the DF was nice and quiet (taking a photo on the D700 led to startled faces, and could only be done when the orchestra was playing loudly during a performance because of sound issues), fast to use, surprisingly better autofocus, lighter and faster to use, and so on.</p>

 

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Thank you, Simon. I'm going to respond to seek clarification, not to argue. :-) I completely accept that my experience with the Df was limited, so I'm happy to learn.<br />

<br />

I agree about the ISO button on the D700 (and every other Nikon I can find). My concern is that my work-around, auto-ISO in manual mode with exposure compensation, <i>also</i> requires two hands on the Df. Unfortunately, for me the 70-200 isn't "niche" - my most-used lenses are the 14-24, 70-200, 150mm Sigma and 200 f/2. For me, a 50mm prime is "niche", but I accept that everyone's different, and that the Df will suit others better than me. I don't even find the Df's grip to be uncomfortable except when torqued with a heavy lens, so I think I had my hand in the right place.<br />

<br />

I'm surprised that you find EC to be as fast on the Df as on the D700. That's really my saviour with the D700/D800 for full camera control. I can handle the control interlocks on an F5, so I don't think I was being particularly clumsy.<br />

<br />

Anyway, at the risk of veering off-topic, I'll be interested in what handling issues from the D700 you feel were improved by the Df. I'm not saying there aren't handling issues - I have my own list, and adding more options to the Fn and DoF buttons would fix several of them - but I've not seen them fixed by the Df, so I'll be interested in yours. I'm also curious whether you use the shutter speed dial and the lens's aperture ring.<br />

<br />

I'm still aiming to understand this camera, having spent as much time as I reasonably could with two of them, now. Just because I think it doesn't play with my lenses doesn't mean I'm uninterested. I'm not sure that Nikon have done a wonderful job of explaining how the Df improves the shooting experience ("making it slower" doesn't count), but that's been true of other products as well.</p>

[simon_crofts]

<blockquote>

<p>I'll be interested in what handling issues from the D700 you feel were improved by the Df.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not sure you want to hear my doctoral thesis on this ;) but there were a lot of issues. I have to dash out just now so am typing this fast and without reading it through so apologies for all the typos etc. The core of them can best be summed up very briefly though that the D700 attempts to control nearly all the core functions through two dials - front and back. You are controlling in effect the whole camera through three fingers, and those three fingers are extremely busy. So for example the thumb is used to autofocus (assuming you've disabled focus through the shutter release, which is essential in my view) but is also turning the rear command dial.</p>

<p>The functions of rear and front command dial change depending on what mode you are in, and sometimes even aperture and shutter speed can switch dials in certain modes. It's a mess.</p>

<p>Nikon appear to have done all this partly to save money in a modular environment, but also so that the camera can be operated single-handed with a heavy lens like the 70-200. Having one (not very good in my view) lens dictate and compromise the design of the camera is in my view a mistake.</p>

<p>The philosophy of the DF is to have dedicated dials that pretty much retain their function throughout. It is clear and simple, and you can pretty much pick up the camera and set to work with it without glancing at the manual (though there are a few customisations that are near-essential, like disabling focus through the shutter button).</p>

<p>After 8 years using the D2x/D700 I still couldn't tell you what the command dials do when you switch to different modes. My fingers have more or less learned it by now, but it's a mess. And I can't tell by glancing at the camera whether exposure compensation is set, shutter speed, ISO etc., I have to turn it on and go through the numbers.</p>

<p>On a smaller point, the front dial of the DF is an improvement on the D700's front dial. The latter was very stiff on both mine when they arrived and took time to loosen up, but more importantly you can only make little turns because only a small amount of the dial is exposed. On the DF, it's easier to make a quick change of aperture through several stops per 'sweep' because the whole of the front dial is exposed.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>exposure compensation, <em>also</em> requires two hands on the Df.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The DF - is a two-hand operated camera. This is the root of one of its big advantages over the D700 etc., which attempted to do everything with one hand.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I'm also curious whether you use the shutter speed dial and the lens's aperture ring</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I got used not to using the aperture ring with the 'G' lenses, so tend to use the front dial - as mentioned the DF's one is (slightly) better than the D700's. I tend to use aperture priority and exposure compensation most of the time, so I only use the shutter dial when switching into manual mode (which I do perhaps 10% of the time, particularly when I want a consistent exposure). The duality of the controls means that when I switch into Manual mode I know exactly what shutter speed I am going to get and I can control it very clearly (and do so in advance). This is the 'fusion' aspect of the DF which is really nice - you can switch seamlessly back and forth between the different modes without getting mixed up (on the D700, if I remember right, in manual mode the rear dial becomes aperture control whereas in Aperture priority it's the front dial - I may be remembering this wrong as I don't have the camera in front of me, but the very fact that I can't remember which modes the aperture/shutter uses switch without looking at the camera over shows what a mess it is!)</p>

<blockquote>

<p><br /> I'm surprised that you find EC to be as fast on the Df as on the D700.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This was my chief concern about the DF - the exposure lock. In fact, it's very light and I can easily tweak exposure control without moving my left hand from supporting the camera and without moving it from my eye. So it's not a problem, unless you have a very heavy lens on the front and need to move your hand to that.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>my most-used lenses are the 14-24, 70-200, 150mm Sigma and 200 f/2</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It may well be that the DF isn't the camera for you - it's clearly not optimised for uses with those kinds of lenses (though it is usable). It is rather like a much more capable Leica M9, and aimed at someone who really wants to work fast and discreetly.</p>

<p>Personally, I hate the old 14-24, 24-70, 70-200 that Nikon has pushed for a long time. They are too heavy, too slow, too intrusive, I don't think they are conducive to good photography for most people (though the zoom trio have their place - and are pretty much standard issue workhorses to news stringers by news agencies). But the DF is a break from that philosophy, and I think it's an excellent thing that they are breaking from it. But to judge the DF as to whether it's the ideal camera to accompany that heavy trio is I think to miss the entire point of the camera. It's more of a Ferrari rather than a juggernaut.</p>

 

[bebu_lamar]

<p>The Df is really a 2 handed camera. If you were to hold the camera with one hand, hold it with the left hand. It should be fine holding it with only the left hand even with lens like the 70-200mm f/2.8. I do use the aperture ring whenever it's available. I can operate the EC with the camera up to my eye but I prefer not to use the EC as I have never use the EC in my life. I use the shutter speed dial often. Only rarely that I use the wheel to fine tune the shutter speed. <br>

I said Kai Wong can't hold the Df because he walked around and held the camera with his right hand. It's much easier to hold the camera with the left hand. He held the Leica that way too, I think the Leica should also be held with the left hand. <br>

I am amused because he is a marketing manager of some company and he called the Df "Dismal Failure" and called the D600 "As good as it gets". The Df was a failure and while Nikon didn't sell very many Df they did sell most of the ones they made and sold them for a relatively high price. The D600 is as good as its gets and yet Nikon had to repair so many of them and in some country its sale is prohibited and in some country someone is prepared to sue Nikon. Any company can make a product that fails and Nikon is not alone but the Df is certainly not a failure. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I said Kai Wong can't hold the Df because he walked around and held the camera with his right hand.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I thought the problem is more like him not supporting the bottom of his camera/lens with his left hand when he is taking pictures.</p>

<p>Incidentally, especially for those photo.net members from the UK, any idea what type of accent Kai Wong has? His accent is very different from the typical accent in Hong Kong, which is usually influenced by Cantonese, the Chinese dialect commonly spoken in Hong Kong.</p>