Would You Buy A Nikon Df Camera Today?

[Anthony]

Alright let's do a little quiz here 
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.

[Fons Baerken]

Alright let's do a little quiz here 
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.

[Erik Lund]

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

[John Geerts]

Nikon advertised the Df had the D4 sensor (Expeed 3).   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


That makes the article in SLRLounge a bit questionable...

[Erik Lund]

Nikon advertised the Df had the D4 sensor (Expeed 3).   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


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.

[Jack Dahlgren]

Alright let's do a little quiz here 
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...

[Wally]

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?

[Nasos Kosmas]

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

[David H. Hartman]

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

[Frank Fremerey]

.
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...

[Jacques Pochoy]

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 
c) As a sort of graphic notebook of things i "fancy" around me when I'm in a city or elsewhere 

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 
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 

[Wally]

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...

[Birna Rørslett]

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.

[David H. Hartman]

...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

[Jack Dahlgren]

Wally, when are you going to tell us which is which?