Nikon Df

[Mike G]

Just an observation but the Nikon Df seems to be very popular with you Nordic chaps

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Some use it, some don't. The majority here as elsewhere are not Df enthusiasts.

Extrapolating from a sample is always fraught with difficulties.

However, for me it is the overall best DSLR ever used by me. Certainly the D800/810 class is the most impressive in sheer image quality if you count pixels, but there is more to the final image than that. Good tools that make you want to go out shooting are invaluable. For me, the Df brings back sheer enjoyment into my daily photographic life. So do I care if other people don't feel the same way? Not for a second.

[elsa hoffmann]

Excuse my ignorance Bjørn - but - the DF is your favourite. And I get the impression UV /IR too  - so can one do that with the DF or do you need a converted body for those things?
sorry but my knowledge of the subject is non-existent.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I use a range of other cameras for UV or IR. A single camera design won't cut all the required corners. And yes, those cameras are indeed converted for the purpose. Either they are "broad band" meaning there is no internal filter at all, or they have been adapted by putting a UV or IR-transmitting filter inside.

The broad-band converted cameras are in some aspects the most versatile, as you can precisely define their spectral range by external filtering over the lens.  However, that restricts what lens you can deploy as most special filters only come in a restricted size ange and/or are horribly expensive.

Will I at a future point in time convert a Df? Probably, and then as an IR body.

[elsa hoffmann]

thanks for the info - that is what I thought - but since you are such a DF fan - I was becoming a tad confused.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I prefer to have the appropriate tools to my disposal, no matter what label or reputation they might carry. To wit, over a long period I shot most of my UV with the very humble D40x, which actually is a darned fine camera and severely underrated like so many other low-end models. Øivind Tøien tells me the D40x is about the only camera used by him to function flawlessly in -40C.

[elsa hoffmann]

Have I understood right that the D200 is a suitable candidate also?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Yes and no. The D200 is getting a little long in the tooth now for UV, as it doesn't handle high ISO well. However, it still is a mighty fine camera for IR.

[Erik Lund]

Jakov and I shoot IR with D200

[elsa hoffmann]

And the newer entry level bodies? D3200? D5200?

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I'm using a D3200 for UV and a D5300 for IR. Studio work in UV: D600. product shots  in studio: D2H. UV video: Panasonic GH-2. Everything else: nearly always the Df. Or a D800 if high resolution is mandatory. The 1 Nikons for pleasure, underwater, or just playing around. If the mood really hits me, the Fuji S3 for various UV, multiband, or IR.

Sometimes I open another cupboard and extract various older Nikons such as D40x, D200, or even the D2X.

The limiting factor for travelling is reducing the number of different battery types and associated chargers. Good grief. What a headache. I have a big box with all those chargers in. Easy to put in a car, impossible to haul onto an airplane.

[Airy]

quick reply to original question : I have become a Df fan (despite OM-D and D800). I happen to be from the North - well, northern France. Correlation is not causation though.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

Ain't that the truth.

As always.

[Mike G]

Please don't get worked up, it was just something that occurred to me!

Airy you and I don't qualify as Nordic. 

[Bjørn Rørslett]

We all are Europeans ...

I think the first observation, namely, that Nordic Df users prevail, might not be entirely correct. Thus any further discussion equals a dog chasing its tail

For me, the Nikon Df is the nicest DSLR I ever used. It is far from perfect for which I'm very thankful.