NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: BruceSD on February 12, 2021, 23:12:57
-
.
A photographer in my little town has a Nikon Df camera for sale. Less than 5,000 shutter clicks on it. I am thinking about buying it, but before I do, I would love to get some advice from the Df experts here.
I shoot flowers and other subjects I encounter during my walks and hikes. I mostly post them to the Internet, but do occasionally print up to 20 by 30 inches on my large format Epson printer.
My main camera is a 36mp Pentax K-1. I also shoot 6 older 10-14mp CCD cameras because I love how these old CCD sensor cameras render colors.
The overall rendering of an image is the most important to me; more important than sharpness or megapixels. I have read here on NikonGear that many of you think the rendering of the Df is very special.
I own dozens of lenses, primarily Zeiss Milvus ZF lenses, and old fast Nikkor primes.
Given the above, do you think I'd be happy with the overall rendering of my lenses on a Df camera?
Thanks,
Dave in Wisconsin USA
-
I recently purchased my fourth Df.
-
You value image rendering, got lots of old Nikkors and new Zeiss, you walk and hike, and already have a 36 Mpix camera : you tick all the boxes... get it.
I bought a Df in May 2014 and since then, I've been using it nearly every day (!) and on every trip, and with all sorts of lenses, mosty manual focus.
For full happiness, consider buying a magnifying eyepiece (DK-17M).
I've used other digital cameras, including D700, D800, OM-D E-M1. The Df pics look most natural to me and seldom require significant correction in post processing. Compared with the OM-D which I used in parallel for a long time, the latter often produces briliant images, but they have a "chemical" or "processed" character that is absent from Df pics.
-
.
Thanks so much for your feedback. I greatly appreciate it!
This weekend I'll be meeting this seller and intend to purchase his Df. I'll be sure to post back here photos of the new camera and a few of my initial images.
-
I recently purchased my fourth Df.
What happened with the other 3 Df's?
I think my choice would be a Z6.......
-
I might opt for a Z5 when my eyesight makes MF too challenging. I prefer optical viewfinders.
-
The reason for a Z6 was that there seems to be some nice 2nd hand at a reasonable price and I would like to try the in-body VR.....
Will have a look at Z5......
-
I think my Df was the most enjoyable camera I had, but...
....But, since I use the Z6, I use the Df about...Well let's say...less than 5% of the shootings !
If you don't plan to go toward mirrorless, don't hesitate, go for the Df ! ;)
-
Speaking of the DF .... This seems quite a decent deal. Less than 2000 shots, and a one year warranty.
You will need to run in through Google translate though :-)
https://komehyo.jp/product/270-003-465-0230/
-
The Df is a great camera. It is perfect for walking around with a couple of old nikkors. That said, I use my Z6 almost all the time now. My ability to focus up close is not what it used to be, so having the ability to change magnification in the viewer is nearly essential. If the price is good, give the DF a try. If you do not like it, I’m sure you can find another buyer for it and not lose but your time.
-
Timely post!
There were 3 new in stock Df black kits from Nikon Aus on Amazon.com.au that I’d been watching for a while.
Sudden price drop to AUD$2100 = US$1600 on Friday - so I grabbed another one.
I already have a cherished silver Df since 2014 with focussingscreen K3, magnified DK 17M like Airy, a Match Technical red ladybug soft release shutter button and Artist&Artisan Happogumi silk wrist strap. It’s been with me all over the world, and is always reliable.
I’ve just checked the site and price is back to AUD$4000 and only 2 left in stock....
-
Timely post!
There were 3 new in stock Df black kits from Nikon Aus on Amazon.com.au that I’d been watching for a while.
Sudden price drop to AUD$2100 = US$1600 on Friday - so I grabbed another one.
I already have a cherished silver Df since 2014 with focussingscreen K3, magnified DK 17M like Airy, a Match Technical red ladybug soft release shutter button and Artist&Artisan Happogumi silk wrist strap. It’s been with me all over the world, and is always reliable.
I’ve just checked the site and price is back to AUD$4000 and only 2 left in stock....
How about the focusing screen shims? I have found it to be a crap shoot about which shins to use.
-
What happened with the other 3 Df's?
I think my choice would be a Z6.......
I got a couple of Z6 specimens too, but they are not endearing in the same manner as the Df.
As to the number of Df cameras: one drowned, another is rebuilt as a display item (courtesy my friend Erik) after a major tumble (broke a few ribs myself), two are alive and kicking.
-
I wonder what the conditions of every one's Df's and shutter counts are, mine is about 100k clicks and definitely shows sign of wear.
-
I wonder what the conditions of every one's Df's and shutter counts are, mine is about 100k clicks and definitely shows sign of wear.
Your "mechanical shutter" shows signs of wear?
With my other camera I often use the "electronic shutter" to achieve a faster shutter speed when shooting fast glass wide open during the day. Does the Df have an electronic shutter? If not, do you find that its' fastest shutter speed (1/4,000th) has you reaching for your ND filters?
-
The wear is superficial wear like paint and rubbers peeling, no electronic shutter with the Df.
The Df really shines with mf and fast aperture lenses so 1/4000th shutter is a minus.
-
A couple of times, 1/4000 was too slow when using the Noct Nikkor wide open, resulting in overexposure by 1 EV approximately. I darkened the pics in post processing, that's all. I did not care to lower ISO to 50, as the highlight clipping (if any) would be about the same (it is no real 50 ISO, it just shifts exposure settings).
A very seldom event anyway - who's daft enough to use a Noct wide open at noon, except me of course?
-
I tried the Df and even if I really liked the output, never got used to the ergonomics. The Z6 is more pratical and better suited for my tipe of work. That said, I recently bought a optical viewfinder and is a completely different beast. I don't think you can go wrong anyway.
-
A couple of times, 1/4000 was too slow when using the Noct Nikkor wide open, resulting in overexposure by 1 EV approximately. I darkened the pics in post processing, that's all. I did not care to lower ISO to 50, as the highlight clipping (if any) would be about the same (it is no real 50 ISO, it just shifts exposure settings).
A very seldom event anyway - who's daft enough to use a Noct wide open at noon, except me of course?
That makes two of us :)
However, it is allowed to add an ND or pola filter or similar.
Paco: as to handling, you either love the camera or cannot reconciliate with the ergonomics.
-
My two minor rants about the ergonomics :
- Exposure compensation (which I use very often) generally requires two hands. Grrrr.
- The front wheel (controlling aperture) is small and stiff and hurts your fingers. But I always use the aperture ring when available, so I do not care.
-
My two minor rants about the ergonomics :
- Exposure compensation (which I use very often) generally requires two hands. Grrrr.
- The front wheel (controlling aperture) is small and stiff and hurts your fingers. But I always use the aperture ring when available, so I do not care.
Yes, it works best with manual aperture ring.
-
Virtually all my manual lenses have CPUs. So easy to pogram camera to use aperture ring. Any "G" lens mounted falls back to use the camera dials so the approach is completely transparent.
-
Virtually all my manual lenses have CPUs. So easy to pogram camera to use aperture ring. Any "G" lens mounted falls back to use the camera dials so the approach is completely transparent.
You lucky (but well deserved) devil!
I really think something like a Kickstarter project to revive your CPU chipping program would succeed. But on second thoughts, not Kickstarter, as that is the kiss of death. But really, there must be a way to make chipping Nikkor lenses a commercial success.
-
Would You Buy A Nikon Df Camera Today? No: not now, not before. I know this camera is friendly rated at NG. And I, absolutely, don’t want to make a provocative statement. I had this camera lended, for about 3 weeks, by NPS, a bit after it was issued. Despite having possessed a good number of analog professional Nikon cameras, the charm didn’t work on me. Nothing factual about this. Even disregarding the very high price asked.
-
Ergonomics aside, what I particularly like is the "mature" sensor (shared with the D4, IIRC). Its IQ is definitely better than predecessors' such as D700 and D800, and not significantly inferior to successors'.
When I first tried the excellent Z7, I moved my trusted Summicron-R 50/2 from the Df to the Z7+FTZ. The results were sure excellent, but not to the extent they would make the Df obsolete. Some day I'll enjoy stabilization and focus assist, but for the time being, if my Df broke down, I'd probably buy another one.
-
I had a Df for several years, and have a Nikon D4s for a few weeks now. I feel the Nikon D4s is on all accounts better than the Df. Sensor, ways of operating, and faster AF.
-
My two minor rants about the ergonomics :
- Exposure compensation (which I use very often) generally requires two hands. Grrrr.
- The front wheel (controlling aperture) is small and stiff and hurts your fingers. But I always use the aperture ring when available, so I do not care.
You can set the Df to use +-2/3 EV manual adjustment via the rear command wheel. Extremely convenient when you use M mode and sense a need to make minor exposure adjustments on the fly.
For all lenses with aperture ring, you can set the camera to use aperture settings on the lens directly. This will work whether you have a CPU-enabled lens or not, as long as the camera knpws the max.aperture of the lens.
-
I never found the hybrid FE2/FA, DSLR form of the Nikon Df body appealing. The price also kept me away. There are other attributes to the Df that are appealing. I might enjoy a Nikon Df for exclusive use with AI/AIS lenses but I will probably never get a chance to try.
The F5 interface worked well for me for both AF/AF-D lenses and AI/AIS lenses. As I recall I settled on using the sub-command dial with AF and AF-D lenses. When using AI and AIS lenses the reflexes switched and I use the aperture ring. I didn't change any custom settings when changing from auto focus to manual focus lenses, it was automatic and seamless. The D300s and D800 were similar to the F5 in how easy it was to move from one type of lens to the other.
Dave
So would I buy a Nikon Df today? I don't have the money but if I did maybe.
-
The D300s and D800 were similar to the F5 in how easy it was to move from one type of lens to the other.
So would I buy a Nikon Df today? I don't have the money but if I did maybe.
I owned more than one D300 over the years and didn't like it's sensor. The images I got out of it were flat and lifeless.
-
I owned more than one D300 over the years and didn't like it's sensor. The images I got out of it were flat and lifeless.
That's another issue and I'm in no position to compare. I might like the Nikon Df or D4 sensor better or I might not.
"flat and lifeless?" Is that a lack of mid-range contrast? Is that correctable in Photoshop, Lightroom, Capture NX-D or other post processing software? I frequently used a soft S-curve with LCH in post processing to punch up the mid range contrast.
Punching the mid range contrast was an intrinsic feature of B&W film and paper in the wet darkroom. The film suppressed the shadow contrast while the paper suppressed the highlight contrast. Combined they punched the mid range.
Dave
-
.
Sure, one can "punch up" contrast and colors in post, but I'm one who prefers to manipulate an image as little as possible in post. Not only saves you time, but I believe the more post processing one does on an image the more that image is degraded.
That's one of the major features that appeals to me about the Df camera. So many Df owners say that the images it makes are terrific with little manipulation needed in post.
-
.
Sure, one can "punch up" contrast and colors in post, but I'm one who prefers to manipulate an image as little as possible in post. Not only saves you time, but I believe the more post processing one does on an image the more that image is degraded.
That's one of the major features that appeals to me about the Df camera. So many Df owners say that the images it makes are terrific with little manipulation needed in post.
No image that we look at is not post processed. If we set or accept the default picture control, e.g. Standard Picture Control from the camera's firmware then the camera post processes the RAW data in camera and renders a JPG image we can view on the rear LCD or on a computer display.
If you ignore the in camera picture controls they are still used. If you open NEF files in Lightroom, Lightroom uses one of its defaults. If you open an NEF in Capture NX-D you have a choice of using the camera's picture controls or the latest picture controls. The image will be slightly different depending on which one you use.
If you shoot JPG(s) check your Shooting Menu and see what Picture Control your camera used because it used one.
None of this is to say a particular image sensor doesn't have a character of its own. Even two camera models using identical sensors may have differences in the image processor or firmware.
Dave
JPG(s) straight out of my D850 are surprisingly good to me. I'm using the Auto Picture Control while shooting. What I'm comparing my D850's JPG(s) to are those from the D2H, D300s and D800. That's all I can compare them with. I shoot NEF because as a darkroom guy by trade I want more control. A JPG to me is like a quick test print from my B&W wet darkroom days.
-
To what do Nikon Df's loyal users attribute the look of Df images?
-
To the Df, of course, David, but the real question is the one the initial poster asked: Would you buy a Df camera today? My answer is "Yes."
-
To the Df, of course, David, but the real question is the one the initial poster asked: Would you buy a Df camera today? My answer is "Yes."
I'm casually wondering if I should have bought a Df once.
Dave
[Corrected cut & paste error]
-
I'm casually wondering if I should have bought a Df once.
Dave
Maybe the best deal in town (if the world is a town) ..l
https://komehyo.jp/product/260-003-622-0113/
-
To what do Nikon Df's loyal users attribute the look of Df images?
From what was told by Nikon Pro Service when it was released;
The sensor is based on the sensor of the D4, and the difference/advantage of the Df is that the sensor and electronics are fully designed without video to provide a very clean image.
I'm sure you can find more if you go back and look when it was released.,
-
Interesting info Erik, thanks. In my experience - and for me - the best part of the Df is indeed it's unique sensor. Very nice "non-digital" looking images and very good at high iso's.
-
I think it is a problem if Nikon admits that still image quality is compromised in bodies that has video capability?
Then I want a Z-body without video capability.
Are images from Z-bodies "digital" looking compared to Df images regardless of lenses used?
I assume that "digital" looking is a very "clean" look.....near perfect.....as many Z-lenses delivers?
-
I think it is a problem if Nikon admits that still image quality is compromised in bodies that has video capability?
Then I want a Z-body without video capability.
Are images from Z-bodies "digital" looking compared to Df images regardless of lenses used?
I assume that "digital" looking is a very "clean" look.....near perfect.....as many Z-lenses delivers?
I have both. When I have a chance I'll post a comparison. Please remind me if I fail to do this by end of week.
-
Interesting info Erik, thanks. In my experience - and for me - the best part of the Df is indeed it's unique sensor. Very nice "non-digital" looking images and very good at high iso's.
As far i can see here yes!
-
From what was told by Nikon Pro Service when it was released;
The sensor is based on the sensor of the D4, and the difference/advantage of the Df is that the sensor and electronics are fully designed without video to provide a very clean image.
I'm sure you can find more if you go back and look when it was released.,
I ended up buying that Df camera yesterday. Thanks to everyone for your advice on that camera.
The Df I'm now an owner of is a black one, looks like new, with 2,000 shutter clicks. Got it for $1,000 USD.
I've been doing some test shooting to get a feel for the camera. Here's my initial feelings on it:
1. Just like you said Erik, it's a really "clean" image. Sharp with realistic color - not much to do to a Df file in post.
2. The grip is too small for me - but I ordered an aftermarket vertical battery grip for it which I expect will help.
3. I don't care for all the retro knobs on the top as I really don't use them for my style of photography much. I didn't buy this camera for the retro look, bought it for the incredible sensor that's in it.
4. The sensor is probably the best sensor that I've had in any of the many digital cameras I have owned.
5. It's been very cold here in northern Wisconsin USA lately. I did get out and shot some snow photos. I used a Zeiss Milvus ZF 85mm f/1.4 wide open for the below test shot. The top image is with no processing in post; the bottom image is after recovering the blow highlights in post with the Adobe Camera RAW Converter. The ability of the to recover blown out highlights from overexposed Df image files is very good!
-
Are images from Z-bodies "digital" looking compared to Df images regardless of lenses used?
I assume that "digital" looking is a very "clean" look.....near perfect.....as many Z-lenses delivers?
Alright let's do a little quiz here ;D
Two pictures of a boring Californian backyard (almost same framing, taken minutes apart)
f5.6, 1/125s, Iso100, 28mm 1.4E, NL profile, resized in NX-D, all settings 100% identical for both cameras
Which is the Df, which the Z6?
-
Of course it’s a crap shoot really, but I’d say the top one is DF. But don’t quote me on that!
-
I still like mine
Df, zf2 35mm f/1.4
-
Alright let's do a little quiz here ;D
Two pictures of a boring Californian backyard (almost same framing, taken minutes apart)
f5.6, 1/125s, Iso100, 28mm 1.4E, NL profile, resized in NX-D, all settings 100% identical for both cameras
Which is the Df, which the Z6?
The settings may be the same, but the actual exposure is slightly different, so the second has more contrast. It is hard to know how much of that is down to the sensor and how much to the exposure.
-
Alright let's do a little quiz here ;D
Two pictures of a boring Californian backyard (almost same framing, taken minutes apart)
f5.6, 1/125s, Iso100, 28mm 1.4E, NL profile, resized in NX-D, all settings 100% identical for both cameras
Which is the Df, which the Z6?
Cleaned what do you mean? Noise reduction? Hard to tell but clearly shows my issue with the 28mm f/1.4e colour aberations or rather the blue channel.
At f/5.6 i dont know which is what, but by file size i assume sensor size 16mp vs 24mp may influence jpg filesize so the larger is z6.
-
I think it is a problem if Nikon admits that still image quality is compromised in bodies that has video capability?
Then I want a Z-body without video capability.
Are images from Z-bodies "digital" looking compared to Df images regardless of lenses used?
I assume that "digital" looking is a very "clean" look.....near perfect.....as many Z-lenses delivers?
Of course you can have better quality from a basic sensor and electronics combination if you design for an other application.
Df is derived form D4/D4s - See this comparison for instance:
https://www.slrlounge.com/nikon-df-outshines-new-d4s-high-iso-test-dxomark/
The Z series would be quite mood if they didn't have video ;)
-
Nikon advertised the Df had the D4 sensor (Expeed 3). https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/digital-cameras/slr/professional/df (https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/digital-cameras/slr/professional/df)
The D4S sensor is different. It is also faster (Expeed 4) https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/discontinued/digital-cameras/2016/d4s (https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/discontinued/digital-cameras/2016/d4s)
That makes the article in SLRLounge a bit questionable...
-
Nikon advertised the Df had the D4 sensor (Expeed 3). https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/digital-cameras/slr/professional/df (https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/digital-cameras/slr/professional/df)
The D4S sensor is different. It is also faster (Expeed 4) https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/discontinued/digital-cameras/2016/d4s (https://www.nikon.nl/nl_NL/product/discontinued/digital-cameras/2016/d4s)
That makes the article in SLRLounge a bit questionable...
I know Nikon Pro Service, at the launch, also told other Pros than me about this difference in the electrions handling the sensor data of the Df. I posted this back then but can't find it.
-
Alright let's do a little quiz here ;D
Two pictures of a boring Californian backyard (almost same framing, taken minutes apart)
f5.6, 1/125s, Iso100, 28mm 1.4E, NL profile, resized in NX-D, all settings 100% identical for both cameras
Which is the Df, which the Z6?
I'm guessing top is Z. NL setting on it is pretty flat.
Looks like you are living in an Eichler. I'm in San Mateo so probably not so far away...
-
Cleaned what do you mean? Noise reduction? Hard to tell but clearly shows my issue with the 28mm f/1.4e colour aberations or rather the blue channel.
At f/5.6 i dont know which is what, but by file size i assume sensor size 16mp vs 24mp may influence jpg filesize so the larger is z6.
Cleaned = removed EXIF and resized to same pixel dimensions
Regarding the sensor size influence on filesize: that's exactly why I resized to same dimensions in order to make the comparison more challenging. We'll need to take into account that framing isn't exactly the same. The resulting filesize difference of only 29 kB is IMHO inconclusive. Thoughts?
So far we have 1 correct and 1 wrong answer. Anyone else?
-
From the screen of my iPad I see less contrast and less blue in the frame so I thing DF is on the first photo ;)
-
The color of the sky in the first photo might be a little better or at least more pleasing to me. I see other minor differences but I'm not drawn to one photo as "that's the best."
Dave
-
.
A photographer in my little town has a Nikon Df camera for sale. Less than 5,000 shutter clicks on it. I am thinking about buying it, but before I do, I would love to get some advice from the Df experts here.
I shoot flowers and other subjects I encounter during my walks and hikes. I mostly post them to the Internet, but do occasionally print up to 20 by 30 inches on my large format Epson printer.
My main camera is a 36mp Pentax K-1. I also shoot 6 older 10-14mp CCD cameras because I love how these old CCD sensor cameras render colors.
The overall rendering of an image is the most important to me; more important than sharpness or megapixels. I have read here on NikonGear that many of you think the rendering of the Df is very special.
I own dozens of lenses, primarily Zeiss Milvus ZF lenses, and old fast Nikkor primes.
Given the above, do you think I'd be happy with the overall rendering of my lenses on a Df camera?
Thanks,
Dave in Wisconsin USA
No. I did not like the Df from the start and in the current situation I would go for a Z6 which can adapt any lens the Df can adapt plus many more. And it has its own native set of lenses, plus the ISO 200k is still usable...
-
Well... It's the longest time I kept the same camera in digital times ;) (in film times it would be the FM2n). I guess it "fits" me well ! I use a camera mostly for three things:
a) On a paid work for my school of architecture, life of the school, portraits of new teachers, prize events, jurys, conferences guest, etc. Often in not so good light conditions, reportage style...
b) Family pictures and trip abroad, often resulting in coffee table books as a sure way to archive family memories :D
c) As a sort of graphic notebook of things i "fancy" around me when I'm in a city or elsewhere :o
Up to now the Df is quite enough, with some old and new lenses to achieve those things ! 16Mp, the sensor color, the flexibility of the files, the long lasting battery for the electronic part and the fact that I don't have to dive in the menus as the top knobs and control are quite useful for me (my finger doesn't have a problem with the front wheel ;) ), as getting older I'm a bit short sighted and I can use it without glasses.
Of course I'm a bit weird, having "downgraded" from a 24 Mp D3x to the Df (I did start the digital age with a Coolpix 950 swivel type alongside my film cameras). I don't regret the change 8)
While I follow the Z evolution with interest (new mount, new lenses, new cameras) I'm not really tempted till my vaillant little Df still performs. If it breakdown or is stolen... Well I'll decide then ;D
-
It seems that special look of the Df sensor is not that easy to detect. Are we hunting an urban myth? So far still 2 wrong and 2 correct answers...
-
A downscaled jpg is not giving off all the clues of the original :)
Processing the files in the same manner tells more about similarities or lack thereof.
-
...the bottom image is after recovering the blow highlights in post with the Adobe Camera RAW Converter.
I'm seeing a fairly large area of blow out highlight in the background plus the boundary between recovered and blown out highlight is to my eye rather unpleasant. I wonder if there is more highlight area that can be recovered or if the exposure is just too far to the right? Given the dynamic range of the Df I'm not blaming the Df. Acordding to Photons to Photos the dynamic range of the Df is almost as great as the D850 and similarly that of the Z7 II...
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D850,Nikon%20Df
If you'd like to offer an NEF some of us might try our hand at processing the NEF.
Dave
-
Wally, when are you going to tell us which is which?
-
Sure - well I fully agree with Birna that downsizing wasn't helpful. Otherwise - how would we figure out the sensor uniqueness if we didn't process both images the same way? Too many parameters to correctly interpret any difference IMHO.
Alright, the Df is on top, the Z6 below!
-
...Acordding to Photons to Photos the dynamic range of the Df is almost as great as the D850 and similarly that of the Z7 II...
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D850,Nikon%20Df
...
Not quite, while there is overlap at higher ISO, at ISO100 (that was used in the image comparison), the photographic dynamic range of the Df is nearly one stop short of D850 and worse than D500:
https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D500,Nikon%20D850,Nikon%20Df (https://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon%20D500,Nikon%20D850,Nikon%20Df)
(The Df was optimized for high ISO performance at the time, with a tradeoff in low ISO performance.)
-
On April Fools' Day, Jack. A Df made all the images. ;)
-
I think the Df has had its day in the sun and to be honest I found the control layout kind of odd. I always thought it would have been nice if Nikon had put a control dial around the throat of the lens mount instead of that small thing on the upper front right of the camera, plus they got a bit carried away with dial locks.
For me I'd go D850 though I'm still waiting to see what Nikon does this year (pretty please, a D850 update with the D6 AF sensor and the Z7II imaging and PDAF sensor, and I wouldn't say no to simply plopping in the Z7II chipset while they're at it though I don't expect IBIS). I'd rather not start over again with mirrorless.
To interest me a new DF would want probably one of the Z-body imaging sensors and the EN-EL15 battery, and a cleaner overall design, looks and ergonomics wise a bit more F3HP or F4 base and a bit less "designed by committee". And of course the lens throat control dial for dealing with aperture control on those G and E products and exposure comp on everything else.
But while we're at it, have Nikon ever thought of trying to do a new film camera that supports the E lenses? Or is this film revival a temporary fad that's going to winnow down to a handful of medium format diehards?
-
But while we're at it, have Nikon ever thought of trying to do a new film camera that supports the E lenses? Or is this film revival a temporary fad that's going to winnow down to a handful of medium format diehards?
I'd like to shoot a little 400 ISO B&W and make a few prints each month. I get a peaceful feeling just sitting in my Darkroom under amber safe light. Fun how one forgets the 16 hour days getting customers to press.
It's extremely unlikely that I will ever shoot color film again and although I could do color printing I didn't like it.
Dave
-
To interest me a new DF would want probably one of the Z-body imaging sensors and the EN-EL15 battery, and a cleaner overall design, looks and ergonomics wise a bit more F3HP or F4 base and a bit less "designed by committee". And of course the lens throat control dial for dealing with aperture control on those G and E products and exposure comp on everything else.
No need for another DF, but would be interesting to have a Ds. Mirrorless rangefinder. Z mount lenses and a STZ adapter.
-
YES, "No need for another DF,". . . provided Nikon continued to produce the old one.
-
Second hand DF still sells at higher price than a D4, go figure.
-
Since the OP asked if anyone would buy a df in 2021, I’ll just chime in as someone who has done.
Recently bought a s/h silver Df, (technically at the end of 2020 but) it arrived begining of 2021. I couldn’t resist since it was on sale nearly mint with a silver ring 50 1.8 for about US$1k. 4500 shutter actuations dated 2017. Note that this is about the same price as a second hand Z6 which can also be bought for about $1k
I bought it because I just wanted a fresh perspective and something to remind me of my Nikon SP/F3/F4 that I used to rock back in the late 90s. Knowing full well I have neither the time nor patience for film.
I am aware that a Z series camera would have also been a fresh perspective, but as someone who used the D4 professionally for half a decade, I already knew what the D4 sensor was capable of, so I consider it a steal. Its “bad rep” is working its price downwards favorably for the s/h market, but making a df2 all but impossible.
For me, the Df represents a perfect storm of balance and necessary compromise.
Here are the things that stand out after 4 months’ ownership.
Size and weight is just right for older AFD and MF lenses
resolution strikes the best balance for IQ/file processing size and speed.
D4 sensor was an inspired choice of sensor with its balance between sensitivity and resolution.
These two factors make it very forgiving of pre-millenial glass from an IQ standpoint.
Handling is a brilliant balance between D and F series.
Design is a decent balance between retro and modern:
It doesn’t impose like a modern black DSLR and subjects seem less self conscious.
With a dk-17m magnifier, the viewfinder image is a decent balance between size and magnification:
big enough to work with MF glass but not too big to still be compact or heavy in the hand.
The small sensor resolution means live view update speed is faster than the D800 series and great for nailing f/1.2 at close range.
In fact, IMHO, it's so well balanced that Thanos would probably approve.
Whether you consider them compromises or great balance, is up to you, but for me, not a shred of buyer’s remorse.
Has be come my pleasure photo-cruise camera of choice.
Anyway, OP asked if I would buy one and I say, if you have the money and are looking for something other than the latest and greatest or already own the latest and greatest, then go for it.
-
Since the OP asked if anyone would buy a df in 2021, I’ll just chime in as someone who has done.
Recently bought a s/h silver Df, (technically at the end of 2020 but) it arrived begining of 2021. I couldn’t resist since it was on sale nearly mint with a silver ring 50 1.8 for about US$1k. 4500 shutter actuations dated 2017. Note that this is about the same price as a second hand Z6 which can also be bought for about $1k
I bought it because I just wanted a fresh perspective and something to remind me of my Nikon SP/F3/F4 that I used to rock back in the late 90s. Knowing full well I have neither the time nor patience for film.
I am aware that a Z series camera would have also been a fresh perspective, but as someone who used the D4 professionally for half a decade, I already knew what the D4 sensor was capable of, so I consider it a steal. It’s “bad rep” working it’s price downwards favorably for a/h market, but making a df2 all but impossible.
For me, the Df represents a perfect storm of balance and necessary compromise.
Here are the things that stand out after 4 months’ ownership.
Size and weight is just right for older AFD and MF lenses
resolution strikes the best balance for IQ/file processing size and speed.
D4 sensor was an inspired choice of sensor with its balance between sensitivity and resolution.
Handling is a brilliant balance between D and F series.
Design is a decent balance between retro and modern:
It doesn’t impose like a modern black DSLR and subjects seem less self conscious.
With a dk-17m magnifier, the viewfinder image is a decent balance between size and magnification:
big enough to work with MF glass but not too big to still be compact or heavy in the hand.
The small sensor size means live view update speed is faster than the D800 series and great for nailing f/1.2 at close range.
Whether you consider them compromises or great balance, is up to you, but for me, not a shred of buyers remorse.
Has be come my pleasure photo-cruise camera of choice.
Anyway, OP asked if I would buy one and I say, if you have the money and are looking for something other than the latest and greatest or already own the latest and greatest, then go for it.
My favorite response so far! Thank you!
-
sorry.