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

[Erik Lund]

One thing is numbers - another thing is how they work in real life! Shooting images.

Many users have over time reported that the high MP Nikon, D7000, D7100 where very difficult to shoot, some have even given up using them,,,

[paul_k]

I have (amongst others) both a D7100 and DF

IMO they can't be compared

First and foremost there simply is a huge difference in IQ, that of a top FX (D4, even if the D5 sensor is even newer/better) sensor, and a already somewhat outdated (by the D7200 and D500) DX sensor.
Also, the full frame DF a much better high ISO (easily up to ISO 12800) then the D7100 ('only' IS0 3200 at best) .

That said, IMO the D7100 has a better IQ then, although a similarly 'limited' high ISO to the D300 (have owned one), while on the other hand the AF and buffer (and built quality) of the D300 are better.

The D7100 still can do a decent job nevertheless, although I agree with the observation that getting a sharp image is just as, if even not more, dependent on proper shooting shooting technique (simple holding the camera in a balanced way) and correct AF settings (automated everything AF may seem convenient, but will always be a compromise as it may not focus on what you wanted it to focus on)
And of course don't forget that its higher MP is less forgiving on low quality lenses then the D300, e.g. my kit DX 18-55mm zoom which was my 'go to' lens on my D300 really wasn't up to it on the D7100 (had a similar experience with some of my FX lenses when I went from a D3 to a D800)

Used the D7100 successfully for shooting catwalk (which considering the subject matter - fast moving subject under often not ideal light - is quite challenging) though, so stills etc really should not be a problem.
In my experience it compared to FX just needs  a bit more work in post to get the IQ up to an acceptable level (and I'm not a pixel peeper)

Between the DF and D7100, I find the AF quite on par, just like the built quality, while the DF has a better buffer (although, if you select 12 bit fixed compressed RAW without Jpg, you can up the D7100 buffer from 5 shots to around 10 shots)

That said, the price (both MSRP and 2nd hand) of the DF is a bit, arguably much too high, considering Nikon has alternatives with basically a, apart from IQ and high ISO, in many respects quite similar (D610) and even superior (D750) performance, which have  a for 'daily' use much more conventional /better UI (having in the past shot bodies like a F2 and FE for a long time, I personally don't mind the DF 'knob and dial' set up)

I personally bought a DF as I wanted a smaller, lighter, digital body that was better balanced with my old manual Ai lenses (which even on a D800 feel too small, let alone on a D3 or gripped D800) and for me it really is the best Nikon DSLR for use with manual lenses, e.g. also used it with Petzval lens
http://m3.i.pbase.com/g9/20/670620/3/156857543.BpZnCiEN.jpg
(DF 2.2/85mm Petzval ISO 100 f2.2 1/360th)

Got the D7100 (2nd hand) as an upgrade for my D70S (great little camera, but UI and IQ were starting to really feel outdated when used next to my FX bodies) and D2X (basically broken due to a bent lens mount, repair of which was considering its age, and high ISO, for me not economically feasible)
But for me it's just my 'tag along' camera, for the occasions I want to be able to shoot a better picture then with my phone, but don't want to take my more expensive (and bigger/heavier) FX bodies with me

[Lars Hansen]

Many users have over time reported that the high MP Nikon, D7000, D7100 where very difficult to shoot, some have even given up using them,,,

I was one of those who gave up on the D7000. I was getting mostly poor results. "You might need to get your body and lenses calibrated" was the answer from the camera dealer. Then the gear was calibrated by Nikon service - they reported everything was fine. However I still got mostly poor results. I decided to return and buy another D7000 body. Same issues. I argued that my old D40 was fine with the lenses and was then told "shooting with a 16mp camera probably requires better shooting technique".  Sounds reasonable I thought..

I then slowly realised that most shots taken via LV ("live view") was fine - however I was mostly using the OVF. The D7000 was my first camera with LV and the lesson I learned was that LV uses contrast detection AF and focusing via OVF uses phase detection AF. By comparing shots taken via LV and OVF I could reproduce the issues.   

I then decided, for fun, to try a Fuji X-E1 instead. No mirror-slap and only contrast detect AF. Same sensor size and resolution as the D7000 but I got sharp, well focused images from day one and I still use the Fuji. 

[RobOK]

The cost of a refurbished DF is well...."kinda' high. Is the DF's 16mp/FF the magic combination

You will find a lot of Df fans here including myself. I went from the D300 to the Df and have never looked back. There is some quality to my images that I love but can't tell you what that is. The usability point that sometimes comes up is the relatively shallow grip. I am not a fan but have gotten used to it, but for others it is exactly what they want.  The low light AF is not strong for me, but the resulting low light images are amazing.  Be sure to rent or borrow one for a few days before pulling the trigger.

If the Df is too much there are many options for you including the D750. You will find different strengths and weaknesses between D750 and Df.

BTW, your posts are fine... no one here has thin skin, but they will tell you what's on their mind!!   

Rob.

[Akira]

Another looser on D7000.  I loved the image character (black was rendered beautifully and the color was rich), but it was very difficult to suppress the blur when handheld.  AF wasn't impressive, even though both the camera and lens was calibrated.  I wasn't impressed by the AF of D610 that shared essentially the same AF module with D7000.  It was easier to handhold, though.

D750 finally mitigated these two of my major problems.

[Steven Paulsen]

First & foremost, "Thank you."

I got a chuckle with Erik's reply about being a "numbers" game. I am just seeking insight & finding a sweet spot. (I wasn't aware there were others with similar issues regarding the D7xxx, series.) My D5200/18-70, (back lid closed,) is a decent, toss in the car, tool. The D7100 is a bit of confusion.

I use it mostly for macro, live view, magnified. I'm leaning toward the opinion that 24mp on a half frame (DX,) is too much/many. I actually would have less complaints if it had the same build quality & similar functions as the D300. The D500......no...to little, too much... too late.

I have quite a few Nikon mount lenses already, and am pretty much, fine. I am just curious about the performance of the 16-24mp sensor(s) on 35mm frame size, camera bodies. Except for NYC, there are no,"hands on" camera stores, anymore. I wasn't impressed with the build of a D800, but that's just MHO.

A Nikon DF, D750, D610 experience is an, "Ah.....wait for the truck/shucks,..... send it back," credit card, ransom game.

The DF reminds me of my pile of Nikkormats, F1, F3, FM camera bodies.

I only wish to all, (Me included) that photography is fun, fulfilling & "If it pays your bills," you get a bonus round.

Thanks again,
Steve
 

[Erik Lund]

LV is good for focusing on D7xxx but the shutter mirror makes the came shake.
So you need to switch to Mirror up during exposure.
LV in later D810 is much better implemented,,,

[Ilkka Nissilä]

LV is good for focusing on D7xxx but the shutter mirror makes the came shake.

The mirror stays up in live mode on the D7x00 and does not go down between shots unless you exit live view. However there is no EFCS on these cameras so the shutter may create some vibration.

[Akira]

One thing I could add would be that the additional battery grip mitigates the blur caused by the shutter/mirror shock noticeably.  But mounting the camera directly on the tripod head feels a bit awkward.

[Jack Dahlgren]

A Nikon DF, D750, D610 experience is an, "Ah.....wait for the truck/shucks,..... send it back," credit card, ransom game.

The DF reminds me of my pile of Nikkormats, F1, F3, FM camera bodies.

I only wish to all, (Me included) that photography is fun, fulfilling & "If it pays your bills," you get a bonus round.

Thanks again,
Steve
 

In my experience, the Df has been fun. I've enjoyed it.

[Lorne]

Steve,

As with Airy, Tommie, and Rob, I love my Df. I bought one on its debut in 2013 to replace my long-term D200, and was really impressed with its higher IQ.

Fwiw, I dithered for ages on whether to opt for a D810 prior to the Df rumours. So my choice was the D810's 36 MP sensor or the Df 's retro-style & controls + D4 sensor.

Good luck deciding.

[Bjørn Rørslett]

I also love my Df although with a little mixed feelings. The camera brings fun into photography and for that I'm eternally grateful. However, it is constructed less robustly than one would expect from its appearance so really needs to be handled with care. My humble D40x takes more abuse than the Df

[Steven Paulsen]

On Feb. 23, 2017, In Southern Pennsylvania, USA the outdoor temperature hit 74 degrees, however there isn't anything blooming..... thus the fuss of preparing my gear sack.

Next week, I may have a royal dump, snow storm. I spent a lot of time today, playing with the D7100's focus modes. While I've found that dynamic & 3D focus mode works better than single or multiple points......manual focus is pretty much gold on this critter.

I have a CF explorer tripod, & usually end up with an angled center post. Configured properly, it's plenty stable... even with my slr/N & 85pc. I use a cable release on one, remote trigger....mirror flap, up.

(I started macro long before I had a micro lens.) Try shooting bugs & blooms with a reversed 24mm.

Diffraction? I tried a few shots with my Kodak/85pc & cranked it down to F45.  (They had to put it there for a reason.) IQ was fine.

Gotta quit complaining. The Kodak & 85 is a joy to use. No live view. Horrible low rez screen & dirty knees, damp butt, peeping trough the VF.

 

[Bill De Jager]

One thing is numbers - another thing is how they work in real life! Shooting images.

Many users have over time reported that the high MP Nikon, D7000, D7100 where very difficult to shoot, some have even given up using them,,,

The D7000 has 16 MP across the sensor.  The Df has also has 16 MP but across a larger sensor.  The difference in sensor size affects pixel pitch and performance but not overall resolution.

[Erik Lund]

The D7000 has 16 MP across the sensor.  The Df has also has 16 MP but across a larger sensor.  The difference in sensor size affects pixel pitch and performance but not overall resolution.

A typical number comparison that doesn't make any sense IMHO. Not in any way or form does a D7000 and a Df produce a similar image.