Talk me out of "NAS" in regards to a DF (long read)

[Steven Paulsen]

This is only my personal opinion.
I loved the D300. It was a 2009 purchase, & I'm certainly not an early adopter. When the hype for the D300's replacement was the D7100 I balked & ended buying one afer the D7200 was released.

IMO.....what a piece of crap. (edit if needed) I had to learn proper sensor cleaning right after opening the box. Image quality......My photos look like a 10 megapixel image interpolated into 24. (100% crops are smears with no defining detail.)

I only have a couple $1k+ lenses. (a 70-200/2.8VR/V1 & an 85PC-D.) I must admit, some images from the zoom are acceptable, but closeup's w/the 85pc, (buds & blooms of flowers,) all seem to lack the detail I expected from a 24mp sensor. See again, the above sentence(s) in bold.
OTOH, I have a D5200 which seems to be a somewhat better performer, especially with the old 18-70 Nikkor. I don't care about a focus motor. (Put an Ai metering ring/tab on a cheap, low life camera body.)

In protest, I went backwards to a D700, (build quality/ISO performance) Also, a local pro retired & I go his FF 13.5mp Kodak. I have no honest complaints on either. (But they were made in 2004 & 2008.)

The cost of a refurbished DF is well...."kinda' high. Is the DF's 16mp/FF the magic combination, or just another point of future complaint? For $2k, in my neck of the woods can buy a semi-reliable automobile.
I tried the "new 24mp half frame, Nikon's DX flagship" & it failed, miserably.

Do I need to learn...once more...."Newer is not always better?"

[armando_m]

I went from a D300 to a D800, 12 to 36 mp

On the D800 I often found the images were not sharp

I had to be extra careful with camera motion blur and precise focus, when everything is right it is much better IQ than the D300, but if I get sloppy it is not forgiving

Perhaps something similar may have happened to you, but then you mention you find the D5200 better ... perhaps the 7100 has a problem ?

[Jakov Minić]

If you happen to find the Df sensor to be inferior to the sensor of the D300, then your screen name fits.

[Airy]

My Df killed the NAS. I had a D700 before, and still own the D800 that the Df overshadowed.  I am currently on holidays in Portugal  ugh sais Df, plus Nikkors 50/2, 105/2.5 AI, and the Tamron 45/1.8 for sPecial purposes.

[MFloyd]

"the NAS"

[Bent Hjarbo]

Sound strange, but I have not used any of the 4 digit Nikons, but used D700 and D300s without problems, on my new D500 (20MP) I have not seen any problems like the ones you have, even my newly acquired D800 works fine. I have not experienced the focus problems often reported by others, and it works fine with very old Nikkors, with is a surprise to me as it seems to do better than the D700 in that respect. The D700 is a nice workhorse.
Must be the D7100 that have a problem?

[Erik Lund]

You need high shutter speed and/or flash or a tripod with high mega pixel count cameras especially DX - otherwise you will have smeared images,,,

[Akira]

If the camera is functioning properly, the shutter/mirror shock of D7100 might be the culprit.  The shutter/mirror response of D5X00 and D3X00 cameras are slower than D7X00 series, and thus the former are less prone to cause the motion blur on the camera.

[David H. Hartman]

If one is pixel peeping a 36MP image it's like looking a small mural close up. That going to be very unforgiving. At that magnification there is very little DoF. Camera and or subject motion will degrade the image. It's not the fault of 36MP. It's just very high magnification. It's like looking at a very high resolution film at 80x (not an exact figure, just from the top of my head). A film like Tech Pan had extremely high resolution and some slide films were brutally Frank about one's technique.

If the film prints well at the size you want ultimate sharpness and 100% pixels isn't that important. A lens with VR can help but even a rock solid tripod doesn't help with subject motion. Try to sharpen up one's skills and move forward. 

I've never used a 24MP DX camera but the pixel density is pretty high so I'd expect it to be something like dealing with a 36MP FX camera.

Don't over stress at 100% pixels. If one can make the image you want (print or web) from an NEF it's all good.

Dave Hartman

...who is suffering with an acute case of NAS but has no money.

[Am I the only one or do other peoples smart phones change words on them?]

[Steven Paulsen]

I've learned the single point AF on the D7100 is nothing but trouble & use "dynamic or 3D," for viewfinder distance shots. (I'm also well aware of locking a camera to a pod/mirror up/timer countdown or remote click.)

My remark about the D5200/better was because, the only "wow" shot between the two camera bodies was a very low light shot of a blue heron using the D5200. Out of 100's to 1000's of shots between the two, I'm very much under impressed.

With the severely outdated bodies, I get what I expect, & sometimes more.

Yes...feel free to joke on my login handle, & I realize that some of my opinion may step on a few toes. Laugh away.

Broadly stated..... Flora pistils, pollen....it seems that 24mp only adds muck, not more detail. My Micro collection only includes.
1. Nikkor 60/2.8D (never use)
2. Nikkor 85/2.8PC-D
3 Vivitar 100/3.5 (yes, it is "plastic fantastic.)
4. Nikkor 105/F4/AI
5. Nikkor 200/F4 Micro/AI (w/reversed 4t)
6. Series One 90-180/F4.5/Ai (yes, it' worth it's weight...2.2lbs)

If there is a problem with my D7100, Melville, NY is a nightmare. A local pro told me similar problems about her D7100. Now it's problems with her D610.

I'm both hopeful & somewhat doubtful about a DF.

[Roland Vink]

I wouldn't come to conclusions too soon regarding the D7200 vs D300. The sensor is a couple of generations newer than that found in the D300 - it has higher resolution, better dynamic range, better high ISO performance, and is still considered state of art even a few years after it was introduced. I'd take a careful look at what you are doing especially with macro, there are a lot of things which could affect sharpness besides sensor performance:

- How you are supporting your lens and camera - use a good quality tripod with remote release, or flash or high shutter speed to elimimate camera shake. Due to the high resolution of the D7200 sensor, flaws in your technique will show up that are not apparent on lower resolution cameras. If shutter shock is the culprit, try setting the camera to "Q" quiet mode, the shutter seems to be less violent in this mode so seems to reduce shake (I use the same with my D600)

- What aperture do you you shoot at? If you generally stop down to f11 or smaller, diffraction will start to show and is more noticeable on the D7200 sensor, again due to the higher resolution. Note that the 105/4 micro at 1:2 looses one stop at 1:2, and two stops at 1:1, so even if the aperture ring is at f11, the actual aperture will be f22 - you may be getting diffraction when you thought you were safe. AF Nikkors report the correct aperture to the camera, as they take into account light lost due to extension.

- Check the performance of your lenses. Lenses which are perform well on low resolution cameras may not be able to match high res sensors - softness and CA might show which was not apparent before.  Not sure about the Vivitar 100, the AI 200/4 micro is not well corrected for CA, the 90-180 might be struggling on high resolution cameras? The others should perform well though, if your technique is good

Hope that helps...

[tommiejeep]

I cannot help you by talking you out of your NAS re: Df.  Still may favourite Nikon.  I recently almost bought a second one used but still mint.

The D7100 is my least favourite Nikon.  I bought it about the same time as the D610.   Even though the D610 only had the 39 pts , it out shot the D7100.  Since I shoot mostly birds I most often use center point.  Single point was just not good on the D7100 so always used 9 pt.   I really like the way the Toshiba sensor handled white birds in bright sun .  I sold the D610 to buy the D750.  I've since killed the D750, sad story.  Thought about buying another one (Nikon offered me a deal) but will wait and see what Nikon does next.   I was just offered a D810 (7K clicks) at a very good price.

I still shoot the gripped D300 (2007) and gripped D300s(2009) but sold the D700(2008) recently.   If I were shooting what you shoot the D810 might be on the cards but I also have the 42MP Sony a7rii so....
So far my new D500 is proving to be a very good camera for what I shoot.  The upper usable ISO is about all I normally need.   Back to the Df, that 16MP sensor is just so good.

[Jack Dahlgren]

I don't think you want to be talked out of it.

I have a refurbished Df which I think is a great camera for me. Plenty of dynamic range and low light sensitivity. I don't use autofocus so that is not an issue for me. In general I just set the shutter speed and aperture where I want and let autoiso do the rest - dailing in some exposure compensation as needed.

For what I photograph there are plenty of megapixels.

[PeterN]

It's a free world. If you loved the D300 and nothing after, buy another D300 and forget about everything that 's newer. Buy a semi-reliable automobile instead and be happy with the D300.  There are plenty of people who are happy with their D200s, D300s and D700s.

[MFloyd]

I would go very like along with PeterN's conclusion.

With regard to sensors; herunder a PDR vs ISO setting comparison between the D300 and D7200.  Conclusion: a lot has changed over time...