Not enough threads on the Df

[donbright]

<p>There's no doubt the Df can get the job done. I think Nikon may have determined through survey that may of us out here have a considerable AIS lens collection, so to complement that they created the Df. Also in these very forums, the wish list of many Photographers, whether new, or not so new, was to find select AIS Manual lenses to add to their arsenal. The Df suits this methodology, and the irony is that retro or not, Df sales heavy or not, isn't necessarily attractive to one age group over another. Could very well be that the Df is more about attitude, mood, a method, than any thing else.</p>

[constance_cook]

<p>Did I indicate in any way that retro had something/anything to do with making better pictures?</p>

<p>What I said was I liked the way it looks. If I'm not doing anything illegal and am willing to skip something I don't want as much then just wlk on by.</p>

<p>Looks are why there are many models of cars. They will all get you there but they don't all look alike.<br>

Conni</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>What I said was I liked the way it looks. If I'm not doing anything illegal and am willing to skip something I don't want as much then just wlk on by.<br>

Looks are why there are many models of cars. They will all get you there but they don't all look alike.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Precisely Conni.</p>

<p>I am very glad that you said (or wrote) that bluntly. We actually have no shortage of threads about the Df, but the amusing part is that the half a dozen of people who own (or going to own) the Df have repeatedly come up with amusing excuses to justify the purchase and the high price.</p>

<p>Go back and take a look of the image I posted earlier: the top view of the D300, Df, and FE. In order to create the retro look and controls from the era of manual-focus film SLRs, including a tiny grip that is similar to the one of the F3, on a digital SLR with AF, Nikon has to make a lot of design compromises. For example, gone are the large LCD on top, since that space is now for the shutter-speed dial and the SPAM exposure mode knob. The fact that the Df has only one memory card slot is not some oversight. There is simply no room for it since the grip is so small. As the way it is, some people are still complaining that the Df is too big, unlike the FM/FE; that is simply unrealistic. If small size is what you are after, go mirrorless.</p>

<p>In my up-coming Df review for photo.net, I have several paragraphs on the Df's design compromises. It should be in queue for publication soon.</p>

<p><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=478687">Allan Jamieson</a>, sums it up quite well earlier. If you are into the retro looks and controls, well, you need to pay for it. Otherwise, there are plenty of more economical choices, especially for prices in the UK:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Nice camera for travelling light but insane pricing, for the money a new D610 is far better value on Amazon now for just under £1300, retro is all very well but not at any price!</p>

</blockquote>

[nikofile]

<p>I don't think Don was knocking someone who likes the way the camera looks. He is saying it is a good picture taker regardless. Personally, I don't think Nikon considered the design as a matter of compromises. In one way it is not a compromise in any way. If you want to shoot the way you did with your FM or FE, it is perfect. You have the aperture ring on the lens, the shutter speed on the dial, the aperture indication in the viewfinder, the exposure +/- in the finder, and the cherry on top is a "film speed" wheel on the left top. Put the mode switch to M, the metering to center-weighted, and If you use nothing else on the camera, you have exactly what you had with a Nikon FM. A little larger of course, but I do not believe they could make a Nikon F digital camera smaller. Another point about the complaints. How many of you did everything you could to get that bloody split prism out of your camera. Nobody liked that thing as far as I know, but you hear so many bellyaches about it. It is only useful in certain situations, and it is always slow and always in the way. No, I don't believe there were compromises. I think Nikon made it the way they wanted to.</p>

<p>One more thing. I understand that a D610 gives you some things you don't get with the Df. But if that is what you want, why would you even look at a Df? A Df is a Df. A D610 is a D610. It kinda seems that many eople want something from Nikon that cherry picks their favorite features from each, and costs what the cheaper camera costs. This is crazy.</p>

[sexgun]

<p>I agree with Don Bright: "Retro or not, I don't see what the looks of a camera has to do with making good pictures. If it were the reality, old beat up, tarnished camera's would make, beat up, tarnished rotten pictures, and that the better looking camera, subjective, would be making beautiful pictures." Furthermore, I'm reminded of the old advice that if you go to buy an old guitar, beware if it's in mint condition. That may mean that someone did not like playing it, and you may be better off with an old, beat up guitar that got played every night. Haha.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Roy, I have my D800E right in front of me. Take a look at the top LCD. It shows you info about white balance, image quality (RAW, Tiff, JPEG basic, fine ...), which memory cards are in use (CF, SD), ISO selection, auto bracketing .... None of those selections were available during the film era, at least not selected from a frame-to-frame basis. Back then, if you needed different color balance or different ISO, you changed to an entirely different roll of film. In those days I sometimes carried two (or more) bodies with different speeds of film, maybe ISO 100 and 400.</p>

<p>By forcing the controls back to the way it was during the FM era, all of a sudden the info you need for the digital era are now missing from the top LCD. Instead, the Df is more like the consumer-grade D3000 and D5000 series which have only one LCD on the back, and all the info have to go to that one display. You can still get it to work, just less convenient.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I agree with Don Bright: "Retro or not, I don't see what the looks of a camera has to do with making good pictures. If it were the reality, old beat up, tarnished camera's would make, beat up, tarnished rotten pictures, and that the better looking camera, subjective, would be making beautiful pictures."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>There are two separate issues.</p>

<ol>

<li>One is whether a camera looks shiny new or beaten up with dings and scratches. As long as it is not damaged, a beaten up, ugly looking camera can still be just as good as a brand new one as far as capturing images goes.</li>

<li>The Df's retro look directly affects the controls of the camera. By forcing the old-fashioned controls onto the Df which has all modern internals, as I pointed out in the previous couple of posts, a lot of the displays and controls are now necessary to control a digital camera become less conveniently located. If you work in a fast-pace manner, it can make a difference.</li>

</ol>

 

[nikofile]

<p>Shun, you are assuming that this camera was supposed to present the same conveniences as a D800. I don't believe it is. I think you get every thing you need to take photos as we once did. Is the modern way more productive? Absolutely. However, some people don't want to produce anything. They just want to enjoy taking photos. Some of that info you pointed out is necessary perhaps for an event photographer in some cases. The easy answer is don't take a Df to that event. In other words, for those of us looking for "simple", this camera delivers. It gives us every thing we need to go back to another time. It removes video buttons and menus, which is something a lot of us applaud. Just because video would be an easy addition, why can't there be just this one camera for those of us who don't want that stuff using any of the real-estate? Videographers have plenty of choices, almost every camera made except this one.</p>

<p>For that top LCD, there is scant area available if the camera is going to have what a lot of us want up there. As to that, they could have left it off entirely. But for those times when we want to shoot "new", it gives us the basics. That's enough. The first priority for this camera, I believe, was to allow people to take photos the way we used to. They made it just for us, and then they added some bells and whistles because we will all use them at times. But first and foremost, this is a camera made for Nikon manual lenses and the people who want to use them. Personally, I think modern G lenses are optically better, but that isn't always so important. My approach to this camera is going to be Nikon FM2n first and Nikon D700 second. BTW, neither of those had video. I still have a big old D800E if I want it, and a person could always have a D7100 backup if they want modern. If they can only have one, and they want what you suggest, they best buy something else. The Df is not a one-camera solution to everything photographic. I think that's a good thing.</p>

[constance_cook]

<p>Almost none of my cameras show wear. I am very careful because it was deadly with my parents not to be careful. Also, I'm not shooting sports and very little wildlife. I do travel. portraits and micro. I think none of my cameras show brassing because my hands don't sweat enough to notice. </p>

<p>I have no idea how many photos I've taken but I have 6' bookcases full of video boxes with neatly labeled photos and two 4' x 5 drawer high file cabinets with hanging files filled with negs. So my cameras are workhorses. They also have hundreds of thousands of frequent flyer miles. So the old adage about brassing or a worn guitar as like as not just show lack of care. Others do demonstrate a great history of use.</p>

<p>I have very heavy new dSLRs with all the bells and whistles but it's unlikely I will get the use of them I did from my F5 and F6. But even when I used those all the time I really enjoyed manual focus with the FM3a and F3HP. Manual focus on an auto camera just isn't the same. Now that I do mostly digital, I am pleased at the possibility of using the Df.</p>

<p>I will get my hands on a Df somehow and await Shun's coming review.<br>

Conni</p>

[donbright]

<p>Correct I'm not knocking anyone for whatever reason, especially the looks of a camera, as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but certainly it doesn't make a difference as to how the picture looks, beat up ugly camera or not. In regards to the Df, Nikon purposely designed the camera to enhance the engagement of a working style. As for working in a fast pace manner, I think the Dfs arrangements are presented in a way to remind us what that really means. I can't speak to whether the Df is fast or slow, fast or slow for what? No one has defined that yet, but from what pictures I've seen from the Df, I'm seeing both, and, or everything, Weddings, sporting events, landscape, wildlife, still life. What else? I mean it seems like the camera delivers.</p>

[nikofile]

<p>Well, I ordered silver, switched the order to black, and B&H shipped the silver (apparently). Hey, it is my own fault for procrastinating. But both are beautiful cameras, so it is no big deal and not worth switching. And there is still a chance I will actually get a black model.</p>

<p>I found threads on photonet about the Voightlander 40mm f2. And there are many reviews on the web. On balance, it appears to be exactly what I need for my little sojourn into the past. I hope it works out. I hope I find Utopia and fall into a perpetual state of nirvana. Fat chance, but bring it on.</p>

[donbright]

<p>Roy,<br>

I own Voightlaner F2 Ultron Aspheric, and I tell you it is a great lens. It has become my go to lens particularly because of the focal length, it is so versatile. I don't know exactly what happen there, but it seems the Ultron was the answer to Nikons 40mm pancake lens offered with the FM3a. This is my eagerness too, is to get the Ultron onto the DF for the street. Should be the stuff!</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>the Ultron was the answer to Nikons 40mm pancake lens offered with the FM3a.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>What's wrong with Nikon's own 45mm 2.8 GN?...isn't that what the fold out non-AI tab is for?</p>

<p>I never knew nikon made a <strong><em>40mm</em></strong> for the FM3a??????</p>

[constance_cook]

<p>I'll be very interested, Roy, in your review of the handling.<br>

Conni</p>

[nikofile]

<blockquote>

<p>I'll be very interested, Roy, in your review of the handling.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I will let you know. 40mm is the goal for me, and all reviews say focus with the Voightlander is "Leica-like", very smooth. Photozone has the weakest verdict I can find, and even there it is pretty good. Some say it is sharp wide open, others say it isn't. I don't put a lot of importance on that. I have always found the the Nikon 50mm f1.4G delivers very good results wide open, in the right situations, but most people pan it on that point. Every single reviewer lauds handling on the Voightlander, and that is the attraction for me.<br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>This is my eagerness too, is to get the Ultron onto the DF for the street. Should be the stuff!</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

I'm with you on that, Don.</p>

[peter_petrov1]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Roy, I have my D800E right in front of me. Take a look at the top LCD. It shows you info about white balance, image quality (RAW, Tiff, JPEG basic, fine ...), which memory cards are in use (CF, SD), ISO selection, auto bracketing .... None of those selections were available during the film era, at least not selected from a frame-to-frame basis.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Most of these are not essential to my shooting style (when shooting with D300):</p>

<ul>

<li>White balance - set to Auto, almost never changed; in case the camera does not guess it correct I can fix it with the RAW file</li>

<li>Image quality - set to RAW + JPEG, almost never changed</li>

<li>Which memory card - not interested in this, only need to know how many shots could I take - and this is displayed on DF</li>

<li>ISO selection - not needed on DF, there is dial for this</li>

<li>Auto bracketing - not using it</li>

<li>Shooting mode - not needed on DF, there is dial for this</li>

</ul>

Should I go on and start demanding that this is the one true way of shooting, and all cameras should be designed like DF? I don't care; the people who do are the managers at Nikon who decided there are enough buyers for a camera like DF that favors certain shooting style and makes other styles less convenient.

<br />

<blockquote>

<p>By forcing the controls back to the way it was during the FM era, all of a sudden the info you need for the digital era are now missing from the top LCD. Instead, the Df is more like the consumer-grade D3000 and D5000 series which have only one LCD on the back, and all the info have to go to that one display. You can still get it to work, just less convenient.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, this needs serious editing ;-)</p>

<ul>

<li>It is not forcing, it is designing. And nobody is forced to buy DF.</li>

<li>The FM/E era is more correctly the era of shooting in A or M mode, and a bit later also S or P. One can be happy shooting in A mode on FE all the time, why he should be unhappy with A mode on DF with FE-style controls?</li>

<li>The info you need is not the info I need, and vice versa, as shown in the example above. This is quite subjective, and suggesting that everyone needs this info is not correct. You might need it, other might not.</li>

<li>Again, it is not about missing, it is designed this way. One needs big LCD on top with lot of info, someone else needs essential mechanical dials.</li>

<li>Lack of LCD on top is not equal to consumer grade, just look at the professional grade cameras for the last 50 years.</li>

<li>One can find more convenient having mechanical dials on top, someone else prefers even more buttons and screens. Some people prefer vi, other Emacs.</li>

</ul>

It is like a trend these days. People with no experience in running camera company, designing cameras and lenses, and selling them with profit go on the Intertubes and claim how these companies are wrong in any of these activities.

[nikofile]

<blockquote>

<p>It is like a trend these days. People with no experience in running camera company, designing cameras and lenses, and selling them with profit go on the Intertubes and claim how these companies are wrong in any of these activities.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

This has been going on for awhile now. Some of the criticisms about design resonate with some readers. Thom Hogan, for instance, has a large following on this, and perhaps he is right, but as you point out, right only for some people. I think in Hogan's case he does make allowance that there will be some who love the Df.<br>

<br>

I think the important point, for someone like Shun, is that they want some of the features, but they want other things as well. I believe it is futile for those people to pursue the Df (Shun has basically said the same in his case). For those people, there are other options. And certainly they can and do sometimes shoot with manual-like methods. We can do it with any modern Nikon DSLR. But for me, it isn't the same. I want the wheels and dials at the expense of everything else, where the Df is concerned. I don't need another fast, professional body. I need something for my soul that I haven't found yet, and I believe the Df with manual focus lenses just might be it. I hope the experience lives up to my burgeoning expectations. I am going to do everything possible to make it so. I want this.</p>

[nikofile]

<p>I want to share something I read this morning, as an example of how poorly the Df has been reviewed in some cases. There is a lot more to the review than these couple of points, but this will give you the gist. Early in the review we get this:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>It’s also more than a little disappointing that there’s no video functionality. In this day age – regardless of the perceived target market – that’s just unacceptable.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Note: I don't find it unacceptable. I find it absolutely essential that they did not cobble up this camera with video.<br>

Then in the verdict we get this:<br>

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The Nikon Df is a fantastic DLSR in many respects, but it doesn’t quite manage to re-imagine Nikon’s classic SLRs in a way that we can recommend. If you want a full-frame Nikon, the D610 is a better choice.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

WTF? It's not quite retro enough, so just get the D610? You have to wonder about the objectives for this reviewer. Which is it? What do you want? Do you want retro, or do you want a typical Nikon DSLR with typical controls and obligatory video?<br>

<br>

This was a very knowledgeable reviewer, IMO. But his head was in the wrong place. If someone plans to approach the Df the way he did, I agree with him - get a D610. I think the Df demands that the buyer throw out all those preconceived notions of what a DSLR has to be. Forget about your D70 or D300. And you bloody well better forget about your D800E.<br>

<br>

I would like to see more reviews from people who approached the matter with the right mind set. Think about the reasons some people will want this camera, and concentrate on that. I saw one point in a review about the shutter dial offering only full stops (unless you use a combo of the dial and a wheel). How is this a drawback? You can juke the lens aperture (if you have the right kind of lens), and you can fudge the ISO to get where you want. Or you can tweak compensation. And you can do all this without diving into menus. I remember using 1/60 when I was well settled, 1/125 when I wasn't, and 1/250 if people could just not hold still, and 1/500 if they were running. But it wasn't easy because you couldn't swap out the film as easily as we can with a Df. I'm not sure I want to constrain myself to ASA100, for the sake of nostalgia. This is one situation where I would kick it "new school".<br>

<br>

I have these sorts of thoughts every time I read a review. I am playing mind games with myself, getting my attitude right for this camera. I'm pretty sure I know what I want. And if I get it I will have fewer shutter activations in a year than I have sometimes had in a week with other DSLRs.</p>

[bebu_lamar]

<p>Roy! I guess that these reviewers were disappointed at one thing but they never specifically said so is that the Df being a retro camera but it is not a mirrorless. Some how they seemed to think that a retro camera must be a mirrorless. May be because Fuji and Olympus started out that way. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I want to share something I read this morning, as an example of how poorly the Df has been reviewed in some cases.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Roy, since you now have ordered the Df, may I suggest you stop reading reviews? I know you are referring to someone else's review, not mine, but it applies to most reviews.</p>

<p>If you compare features and prices for Df against most other current DSLRs, the Df will always look expensive with fewer features. As a reviewer, those are the issues I would always point out because I am evaluating a camera by its image capturing capabilities. At least that is why I buy cameras. As a result, I agree with most findings on, e.g., dpreview's official reviews on the Df.</p>

<p>However, the Df is a totally different animal. Conni has it right that you buy it because of its looks and retro controls. If that is the way you like it, buy it. You don't need some reviews to tell you whether the Df looks good or not. For whatever reason, apparently quite a few people are reluctant to admit that. As a result, they need to come up with all sorts of silly excuses to justify the purchase.</p>

<p>I grew up in a city with many jewery stores. When I was a kid, I once saw a Rolex watch with a diamond bezel on display, similar to these from a search: <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=rolex+watch+with+diamond+bezel">https://www.google.com/search?q=rolex+watch+with+diamond+bezel</a><br>

I was quite impressed and, now some 40 years later, still remember that moment. It may look elegant, but an expensive mechanical watch like that is not going to keep more accurate time than a cheap, $10 electronic one.<br>

In fact, like most cities, since there is a lot of crime, at least I would never wear a watch like that around.</p>

[nikofile]

<p>You might be right, BeBu, but that doesn't work for me. When I think "old school", I think SLR, not rangefinder. Range finder is "older old school".</p>

[donbright]

<p>Well, looks like the review is done. Get the Df for it's looks, because it has nothing else to offer.</p>

[nikofile]

<blockquote>

<p>Well, looks like the review is done. Get the Df for it's looks, because it has nothing else to offer.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

No, WAIT! I haven't seen it yet! Might not even look good. It passed through Jackson, MS this morning (BTW-I have seen Jackson, many times), and if the truck doesn't catch fire I will get it tomorrow. That's when I can tell you if it can get by on looks alone. But I will be pressed for time. A guy is coming tomorrow to estimate the price for a new roof on my house. Already got one quote, and I didn't much like it. On top of all this, it's going to rain for the next three days, and my new camera might get wet.<br>

<br>

How's this for a review, "LIFE SUCKS......except when it doesn't."</p>

[nikofile]

<p>YES! The UPS guy just showed up. Extracted my Df to check the color, and I did get a silver one. No problem. Absolutely gorgeous, and first handling indicates that the beauty isn't just skin-deep. But first thing is charge the battery while I fool with the controls on the body.</p>

<p>Time for an admission. I have forever had a problem bumping the aperture wheel when I start working a little fast for my comfort zone. Every time I check I have gotten myself 1/3 or 2/3 stop off the mark, not noticing the exposure shift in the viewfinder, and if I don't have auto-ISO turned on I sometimes have to fix it in post. Now, I have to believe I am the only person in the world who does this because I have never seen it mentioned on the web. What I have seen is never-ending moans and groans about the aperture dial on the Df. I have fooled with it for a few minutes, and my smile grew as I did it. It is very solid, but easily manipulated with my index finger, and I am stunned. I expected a monstrosity, but what I got was a better mouse trap. It is a marvelous control. I'm thinking, why didn't they do this on all my cameras? Just slide your finger down from the shutter and push or pull.</p>

<p>So, I had to fool with the ISO dial for a few minutes. The lock is under the thumb, and the dial is easily rotated with the index finger. Very nice. Compensation? Tried it and don't really care. I don't use it often, and it is a deliberate thing when I do. But the control seems fine. Push the button with the index and rotate the wheel with thumb and middle finger. No worries.</p>

<p>The shutter dial is fine. Really nice detent for a solid feel. The release mode dial is bullet proof. No accidental changes there. Same for shooting mode. It has to be lifted just slightly to rotate. Nice. The rear dial feels exactly like my D800E.</p>

<p>Somebody mentioned problems with accidental changes of metering mode. I gotta ask, HOW? The thing has excellent detent. Perhaps it will loosen up with use. I hope not. I would be disappointed. But out of the box it is perfect. Just drop your thumb down from the AF-ON button and switch meter mode without missing a beat. Believe me, you will feel it change, and you will hear it if you are not standing next to a jack hammer. It's bloody genius. So much better than that little dial on the other pro bodies. Those things give me fits.</p>

<p>I put on the little Voightlander, and that thing is kinda tight. Can't wait to see how this works with a battery in it. I will be back a little later with more, but I have already come to the conclusion that some of these reviews we see must be part of a conspiracy. A monkey would do well with these controls. I don't care where they put this button or that one. If you cannot navigate this camera comfortably in a short time frame, you might want to check yourself.</p>

<p>Wow, this Voightlander is smooth.</p>

<p>Oh, gotta add, WTF is up with one complaint I saw about the power button? Thumb-index, ROTATE. You know what, we have morons amongst us. If you can't go from pushing a lever to rotating a nicely knurled dial without your panties bunching up, there is no help for you.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Somebody mentioned problems with accidental changes of metering mode. I gotta ask, HOW?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I did mention that.</p>

<p>See the little switch for Center Weighted, Matrix, and Spot metering is right above the multi-selection pad on the back? At least to me, it is very easy to change the setting accidentally, perhaps from using the pad. I have unintentionally changed it quite a few times in the three months or so when I had the Df. That is one control on the Df that does not have a lock. But fortunately the Df's viewfinder shows the current metering setting and I caught it each time through the viewfinder.</p>

<p>Enjoy the Df.</p>

<CENTER>

<IMG SRC="http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/17712941-lg.jpg">

</CENTER>