simon_crofts

May 14, 2014

Dan, that looks delicious. One of the main things for me is that the nice feel of the camera has just made me want to take it out and take pictures with it. Before I was using the digital D700 for work and the Mamiya 7 for personal work. I still love the Mamiya 7, but the DF is getting more than it's fair share of personal work. It's just a pleasure to hold and use.

And for work it's been a huge step forward too.

May 14, 2014

BTW, one very nice way to use the camera with exposure compensation + AEL is the following:

Set whatever exposure compensation you think is appropriate, and press AEL button. Take your picture. You can review your picture and its histogram on the back of the camera and check that you were right and your exposure is exactly what you wanted (and doing so won't disengage your recorded AEL setting). If you got it a bit wrong, go back to taking picture mode and you can if you want tweak/fine-tune the AEL locked exposure from there using the exposure compensation dial. You can then proceed to take pictures at the refined setting. You can also change aperture if you want to vary depth of field and shutter speed will automatically shift through settings to compensate.

As the subject/lighting/composition changes you can carry out further fine-tuning for different pictures using the compensation dial, all the time keeping you first base exposure locked via AEL. Provided you don't switch the camera off, the AEL will remain engaged, and you can keep fine-tuning and reviewing using the compensation dial. Just resist the temptation to turn the camera off.

To operate that way, I think you have to go into the settings and tick the various buttons that stop AEL disengaging after a certain number of seconds etc.

May 14, 2014

Roy, I know where you are coming from, and for me it was the biggest issue when buying the camera, whether I could live with that lock.

In practise, having used it for a while, it's turned out that I don't mind it at all. There are pluses and minuses to having a lock. Several of the other cameras I have owned - Contax G2, Fuji X100 etc didn't have the lock, but that had the disadvantage that the exposure compensation could be easily knocked, or that I was just less conscious of where I had left it when I had taken the previous picture perhaps minutes before (if I hadn't zeroed it). Having the lock perhaps forces me to be a bit more aware of where I have left the compensation, and once set it doesn't move unless you really want it to. I also found I can operate it reasonably easily with the camera at eye level with only a minor adjustment to left-hand position. The effective use of AEL function also becomes a bit more important if there's a lock than on a camera where there isn't.

So, in summary, after initial apprehension I've grown to quite like the lock. Some other cameras I use also have a lock eg. the Mamiya 7, but the unlike the DF's lock, that one can't be operated with the camera at eye level.

It's just a slightly different way of working.

May 14, 2014

I've posted extensively on this in other threads, so won't go into it too much here, but just to add in my two-penniworth. We have two DF's (one silver and one black) which we used to replace our two D700's. To summarise, we're pretty ecstatic with them (the DF's that is). There are a few details which could be improved (perhaps the size of the aperture read out is the main one, but no biggie), but as a total picture taking experience the cameras are simply superb.

Single card slot is a possible issue - but then the D700 only had single card slot too, so if you were happy with a camera like the D700 then no reason to hold the single slot against the DF. Even with multiple card slots there's nothing to stop a blip in sensor-transmitted information or the camera's CPU causing the files on both cards to be corrupted, so there's no absolute guarantee in any case, you are always dealing in probabilities.

As someone else said: if the camera appeals to you, just do it.

April 15, 2014

That's no problem you wanting to understand it Andrew, no doubt a good thing. The problem comes really when not understanding it starts to cloud the issues and mislead people who may be trying to get to the bottom of the camera.

So for example, you were saying that "the camera seems a bit half-finished" and that the disadvantages of the handling outweigh the advantages compared to the D800. Which is all very misleading for anyone who might be reading the thread for information - this camera really has superb handling, probably better than any other camera on the market, and it's far from half-finished (it's not clear why you might think it isn't, it's just an odd comment).

So those kinds of 'academic exercise' comments from someone who is not that interested in the camera just become unhelpful in case there is someone who actually wants to understand the camera in practical use.

April 14, 2014

Andrew, the solution, if you don't 'get' the controls for you personally - is not to buy one, and don't worry about it. There's no point in endlessly trying to analyse why it's not for you. Just move on to a camera that is.

You'll be missing out big time, but so will most people, thank goodness, the camera is for a minority who do get it.

The day before yesterday we shot a wedding using two DF's, it was extremely intense and an excellent work out for the cameras. The cameras just couldn't have been better - we were both exhilarated about what a huge step forward over the D700 they are, in pretty much every way (and the D700 was an excellent camera), it was a revelation and we couldn't stop talking about what a delight they were to use all the way back home, how much easier they made our day - better interface, more sensitive sensor, much, much quieter, faster focussing, worked better with flashes, more discreet, lighter to carry. The result will be better pictures for the client. But most of all, it's just a pleasure to use - I always left the D700 behind when taking my own pictures, it was strictly work, but the DF I actually want to take with me.

Incidentally, small thing but it took 2200 pictures on one battery (if I remember right it's only supposed to take around 1400). There was still some juice in the battery even after that, but I switched to the spare battery at that point as I was worried about card corruption if the battery ran out mid-picture. Maybe that was just because it was a new battery, but I was expecting to be switching batteries earlier. Not bad.

April 6, 2014

Bebu, I think you're far from alone for choosing the DF for its handling. If you read through those reviews by a number of

different pros that I linked to, you'll see that there are lots of people who think the same way.

We spent all of yesterday wandering the coast taking pictures with our DF's. It was a real delight, just a pleasure to use.

we would never do that with our D700's (excellent camera though that was) - that was strictly for work and would get left

behind when taking personal pictures.

The other advantages - size, sensor etc. are just the icing on the cake.

April 5, 2014

Don, I think emotions are high because the DF challenges expectations of what Nikon are 'supposed' to do. More than that, it challenges a whole philosophy (of buying into big cameras, flashy lenses, complicated buttons and so on). It looks like a 'betrayal' by Nikon.

It also upsets a lot of people who've just invested a big sum in a D800 or similar. The DF is the spark in the right, or wrong, place that ignites a conflagration.

It also just happens to be the best digital camera around at the moment, which just makes the whole thing worse.

Incidentally, I was just checking specs against the Leica M9. The DF is almost as quiet (at least, according to a Leica M9 user who has both, I haven't compared myself) and not very much heavier (756g compared to 600g, with battery in each case), and especially the black DF is very discreet. It must be quite a challenge to M9 sales. I hope the Leica line carries on being developed because they're great cameras.

April 4, 2014

Andrew, I agree with most of what you say.

If one takes the system of holding a camera with the hand under the lens as gospel (which I think is an inherently bad way to hold a camera unless you really have to eg. with a very heavy lens - if you do have a heavy lens then it is often necessary), then that rules out using most of the best camera designs. Try using a Leica M9 without moving your hands from the heavy-DSLR-position. On the whole, it doesn't even occur to the many brilliant photographers who use this camera (and other Leicas) to criticise it for this, because to do so would be an irrelevancy. For some reason, some people seem to try to apply a different set of criteria to judging the DF.

In practice, good photographers tend to be much more adaptable and flexible in the way they use cameras. What really matters is whether it's a good tool and works clearly and easily, not whether the camera conforms to some abstract (and wrong-headed) notion of where the hands 'ought' to be. I'm not suggesting you're doing this Andrew, but just pointing out that people seem to be trying to evaluate the DF by measuring it against some principles that they wouldn't apply to most other good cameras.

April 4, 2014

I think a lot of it comes down to whether you like dials or not. In terms of the DF having 'too many dials' - well it has three: shutter speed, exposure compensation and ISO. So having less dials would involve having two, one or none.

The big criticism that has long been levelled at the D4-type cameras is that they rely on buttons too much and don't have enough dials.So you take your pick of these two approaches.

If you hate the DF's layout, then you'll hate the layout of most of the best cameras around the Leicas, Contax G2's, most medium format cameras and so on. Personally, I love these cameras, and use them all the time. Most of the world's best pictures are taken on cameras like these.

Personally, I think the D4 layout is terrible - a mess. But for someone like Bela who apparently has managed to find their way around it and has bought into it, that's fine. An awful lot of people have, he's far from being alone. But I think that whether you love or hate the DF will depend on whether you've got used to dealing without dials. Personally, I think dedicated dials with a clear function and where it's immediately obvious what the settings are are a huge step forward (actually, re-adopting an idea from the past which just made sense). But that's me.

Glad to hear that, apart from Bela's dial-phobia, he's happy with the camera.

March 29, 2014

Don, you're right, the grip is a non-issue.

March 28, 2014

Andrew, I took a couple of pictures, one of how I hold the D700 normally and one of how I hold the DF when fiddling with exposure compensation. The main difference is an adjustment to the height of the left palm. In both cases the camera is supported on the left side by the palm of the hand and the fingers essentially used for fiddling with controls and minor support.

Not saying this is the best way to do it, but just an indication of one way to use the DF:-

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/41430514@N02/13470936995/">Holding Nikon DF while fiddling with exposure compensation</a>

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/41430514@N02/13471038173/">Holding Nikon D700 'normally' (my way)</a>

Made them b&w because can't be bothered to colour match them ;)

March 28, 2014

I will see if I can get my wife to take a picture of me holding it a bit later on! I don't think I have my elbows very close together though, kind of medium distance, in their natural position - the important thing is to be relaxed and comfortable but with the camera held firmly, rather than trying to 'adopt' a particular pose, I reckon the thing is to do whatever is comfortable. Your elbows may have different joints to mine!

March 28, 2014

Geoff Lawrence has a <a href="http://www.geofflawrence.com/holding_the_camera.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">Holding the camera</a> page that I believe shows what you're suggesting (under how not to do it!)

</blockquote>

Mmm I don't believe too much in these 'how to hold a camera the correct way' pieces - though none of the pictures there show how I'm suggesting holding it, which is using the palm of the left hand for support, not the fingers.

His 'correct' position on any camera looks awkward to me, but I probably need to take a picture of myself holding a camera to be sure I wouldn't ever do that. I think in practise one is moving one's hands to different positions, there isn't one 'correct' position.

I did a reasonable amount of competitive pistol shooting years ago, and I think that really helps with holding a camera (and taking pictures at slower shutter speeds) - there are different ways to hold a pistol (that guy's recommended approach to holding a camera seems to be close to 'New York cop' style with the hand underneath, and I suspect might be inspired by it), and muscle relaxation and especially breathing are important. But ultimately, I suppose it's a matter of getting a comfortable grip using mostly the palms of the hands rather than pinching the body in the fingers.

Anyway, that's a whole other discussion.

March 28, 2014

Sure, Andrew, I was about to type a reply to you much along those lines as I saw that was a sticking point.

First of all, I don't want to talk you into thinking that this the camera for you - if you have picked it up and played with it, and just didn't 'click', then it probably isn't for you - perhaps because your hands work differently from mine, or you have a different approach to using dials, or different priorities, or you just didn't 'like' it emotionally. If you're going to spend a lot of time with a camera, the pleasure of using it is also important. If you didn't already like it, then probably it's best not to buy it. But if you did like it and it was just some details that were putting you off, or some of the silly reviews like that Digitalrev guy, then it's worth looking closer.

Anyway, back to the controls. I don't have the camera in front of me just at the moment, so this is from memory. My way of working is mostly based on Aperture priority, using exposure compensation dynamically and constantly while the camera is at the eye level. I have a second way of working, which is Manual and tending to preset, which as you say the DF is excellent at, but I'll leave this approach to one side for the moment, as most of the time I'm using the first approach and it's what you're asking about.

As already mentioned, I think what I am describing would break down with a really heavy lens like a 70-200mm because of the need to access exposure compensation with the left hand. So I'm assuming that I'm using a lighter lens than that.

So, with the camera at the eye in Aperture priority, setting aperture is obviously not a problem - it's done with the middle finger of the right hand turning the front dial (which is slightly easier to use than the D700's, as I already mentioned elsewhere). Thumb does the focussing via AF button. Shutter speed is of course initially taken care of by Aperture priority.

But exposure compensation is also important. I cup the camera between my two hands - left on left side, right on right. It's a comfortable and stable way to hold the camera. My hands are quite small, but I have no problem with, while the camera is at my face, depressing the exposure compensation lock button with the forefinger of my left hand and rotating the dial with my left thumb. Both the lock and the compensation are very light, so there is no difficulty in doing this. The amount of exposure compensation is shown through the viewfinder along with aperture and shutter speed, so this can be seamlessly done without looking at the compensation dial on the body.

It took me a couple of hours to get used to this new hand position with the left hand, once used to it I'm growing to like it. Though not sure whether I would if I had heavy lenses.

This is a lot easier than using the D700 in its default mode, which requires the exposure compensation button, which is awkwardly located, to be depressed while rotating a dial in a separate position. The D700 however does have an 'easy exposure' compensation customisation available, which makes this easier, and in that case compensation can be done quickly on the D700. The DF is scarcely harder though, because the compensation lock is located with the dial and can be adjusted in one movement. This was the thing that worried me about the camera most before buying, but it's turned out to be fine. I haven't yet decided whether the compensation lock is a good thing or a bad thing - on the whole I think at the moment it is a good thing - my Contax G2 used not to have such a lock and it drove me mad by making its own exposure compensation when pulled out of the bag etc. So I think that probably the DF's approach is the best one on this point.

Apart from that - what do you want to adjust with the camera at your eye? Manual ISO adjustment is possible (though slightly more awkward than exposure compensation), but there is such a good ISO Auto mode that there is not too much need to do this. The D700 was a bit awkward changing ISO anyway and probably involved camera to be taken down from your eye (I always did anyway). I have found that a good option is to customise one of the function buttons to switch quickly between Auto ISO and manual ISO, that way I can either take advantage of the camera's auto capabilities or impose my own manual choice quickly and easily, and switch between the two with the camera still at my eye.

I hope that description helps, but let me know if I've missed something out!

March 28, 2014

what if the D800s comes out with sRAW and I saved up for a second FX body? Hard choice.

</blockquote>

Choices, choices! :)

If you're after... set up the camera in advance, raise it to the eye only for the fraction of the second required to frame, and take the shot - the Df is perfectly functional. I even accept that it might be better at this than other current Nikons. (It would be better still if they'd put a bit more tactile feedback on the dials so it was easier to feel the position without looking at them, but that's for the Df2.) The counter to that is that I believe the camera has been made - slightly - harder to use if your model is keeping the camera to the eye and adjusting exposure settings dynamically.

</blockquote>

Andrew, my comments are based on, mostly, a mode of operating which involves adjusting settings while the camera is at the eye. Though actually I use a mix of the two, but it is critical to me to be able to make dynamic adjustments while shooting without lowering the camera. I get what you are saying - I still haven't decided whether the exposure compensation is as easy to use as 'easy exposure compensation' on the D700 (which is very easy to use), but the exposure compensation is at least 'almost as easy' - possibly 'as easy to use' - and perhaps even 'easier to use'. It's certainly a lot better than I expected - but I haven't decided whether exposure compensation is better than D700 or not. Most of the rest is better.

Simon, it should be very obvious that you are one of the Df fanatics I have in mind

</blockquote>

Shun, I have obviously offended you by my description of a stereotype amateur gear-head, obsessed with shooting bad pictures of robins with long lenses, incapable of taking a good picture, and I apologise if you took that personally. I honestly hadn't looked at your profile before saying that, and the description was not meant to be aimed at you.

March 28, 2014

Shun, just had a quick look at your portfolio. I notice that you are an amateur photographer who mostly takes pictures of birds (the feathered type) with what seems to be mostly (and understandably) long lenses. There's nothing wrong with that, but I wonder if you are the right profile of photographer to review the DF?

As a professional who takes the kind of general photography, photojournalism etc. that the DF is primarily aimed at, who makes a living from the camera day-in-day-out, I am happy to provide Photonet with a detailed review of the camera - for free.

Would you like to take me up on my offer?

March 28, 2014

By the way, in case anyone is wondering, I have no association in any way with Nikon (except having bought some of their cameras), I have never been contacted by Nikon, or offered any discounts from them or offered a camera for trialling, or any other kind of incentive. I paid market price for my DF (and the second one I just ordered too).

I'm just someone who knows a good camera when he sees it, who makes a living from using it, who would really like Nikon to develop a DF2 further along the road, and who gets annoyed when he sees nonsense spouted in attacks on an excellent camera.

March 28, 2014

some people simply don't want to hear anything negative about the Df.

</blockquote>

Shun, if you mean me, then I have mentioned negative points too as I went along. I haven't mentioned all of them (the rather flimsy battery compartment cover comes to mind too - though it's almost as flimsy on the D700 for that matter). And of course, there's lack of video (which you can take as a negative or a positive depending on your point of view, but it's a fact). Nor have I gone in to all the camera's positive points for that matter.

But as a picture-taking camera, and particularly for users of prime lenses, this is the best camera that Nikon, and I suspect anyone, have yet produced, and it's a big step forward in camera design (despite the retro look) so there is a reason to stress the positive about the camera. There are quite a few little niggles, but there always will be with any camera.

Don, I think there are several reasons why there has been such a campaign by amateur forums and amateur reviewers (I say amateur reviewers because professional magazine reviews I saw, like the British Journal of Photography one) have so far as I have seen (and I can't claim to have read them all) been very positive.

I think the reasons are the following:

<ul>

<li>an educational problem: a generation of photographers have grown up with cameras that have made it difficult to get their heads around apertures, shutter speeds etc. I see this constantly with photography students at art and photography colleges - it is astonishing how few really understand the basics of how a camera works, by which I mean aperture/shutter speed/ISO/depth of field, and very many find it hard to see clearly the difference between the different modes (A/M/P/S), let along start to understand how to balance flash and ambient light etc. That is scarcely surprising, since camera design with all its various modes have made it almost impossible for young photographers. Only the most determined get through. So when a camera comes along with dials that are clear and set out the basic functions, it scares the hebby jeebies out of them. The reaction is to dismiss it as 'retro'.</li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>gear-head envy, or 'my lens is bigger than yours syndrome': the DF does not appeal to amateurs who want to look like a paparazzi, with enormous lenses (preferably white), a big camera with hand grip (if you can't afford a D4, you buy something smaller and stick a hand grip on it - 99% of punters won't know the difference), and a big flash stuck on top. This group of people is much larger than one might think, they make up a substantial percentage of any camera club. They constantly have loud semi-jocular arguments about whether you are a Nikon or a Canon user (who cares). The chance that any of them are going to take a decent photo is close to nil. But the DF is a threat to them. They've just invested in D800 + camera grip, and the guy with the DF in the corner is a threat to their territory and self-esteem. And they are slightly jealous that someone else knows what those dials mean and afraid that someone might ask them.</li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>There is a sheep mentality - it was started by the various amateurs who felt threatened by the camera, but Canon helped start it by bringing out an ad attacking the DF as retro. So this became the mantra - that the DF was retro-looking and therefore not a good camera. There was no particular logic to this, since lots of the best designs of cameras - the Fuji x100, the Leica M9, are also retro and haven't particularly been attacked by it. And ultimately, it shouldn't really matter much whether a camera looks retro or not - it matters whether it is the best at doing what it does - function. But here Nikon was betraying their customer base of gear-heads in the amateur community, and they couldn't be forgiven for it. The actual fact that this is a brilliant camera was irrelevant, in fact, it made it worse, meaning there had to be even more noise - kind of shouting la-la-la and sticking the finger in their ears.</li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>A lot of the reviewers are amateurs or inexperienced, and don't really know what they are talking about. You see this all the time, which is one reason why the best professionals tend to use different cameras from the run of amateurs. Until someone like, say, Bruce Gilden is spotted using something like Leica in a viral video and suddenly there is a crowd of clones copying him.</li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>The DF isn't intended to appeal to everyone. It's no doubt the best general purpose Nikon around, but it's not designed for big lenses. cf: gear heads point above. It's also not going to be adopted by Reuters any time soon as their main camera for distributing to their sports photographers. It isn't, and doesn't claim to be, the camera for everything. What it ought to be, if the world had any sense (which of course, it doesn't) the best camera for most of us most of the time, but too many people have spent too much money on big lenses, and they'll defend them with their teeth. So the amateur reviews tend to concentrate on what are pretty much irrelevancies which miss the point of the camera - by concentrating on a detailed analysis handling with an extreme lens like a 70-200 etc.</li>

</ul>

<ul>

<li>Nikon over-priced the camera at introduction. In fact, if you looked closely it wasn't really over-priced for what you were getting, including not only a unique interface, but a D4 sensor, but it was certainly a large chunk of money, and it was going to put most people off just because of the cost. This gave all the people with a vested interest in trying to sink the DF gave a perfect excuse to attack the camera, and the number of people who would stump up the cost do prove the nay-sayers wrong was relatively few.</li>

</ul>

I think that's a reasonable summary of it.

March 27, 2014

any idea what type of accent Kai Wong has?

</blockquote>

A fairly typical/generic south-east or London accent, not really any noticeable regional dialect.

Bebu, I wouldn't worry too much about the way he holds the camera or his opinions about the DF, there's no evidence he has any clue about anything to do with photography except marketing cameras. Looks like he's just trying to get clicks for his company's website by being controversial. Don't bother giving his silly views oxygen.

March 27, 2014

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

</blockquote>

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.

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.

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.

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).

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.

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.

exposure compensation, also requires two hands on the Df.

</blockquote>

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.

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

</blockquote>

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!)

I'm surprised that you find EC to be as fast on the Df as on the D700.

</blockquote>

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.

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

</blockquote>

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.

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.

March 27, 2014

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.

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.

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.

March 27, 2014

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.

March 27, 2014

There are specific handling issues with the Df which are not present on other Nikon

</blockquote>

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.

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

</blockquote>

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...

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.

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.

March 27, 2014

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.

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.

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

</blockquote>

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.

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.

Sign In

Profiles

Forums

Blogs

Events

Downloads

Gallery

Store

Posts posted by simon_crofts