Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Nikon "Retro" full frame DSLR
- Thread starter DAC47
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well, it's official: http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/df/
I still think the lack of video is a bad move, but the camera isn't much smaller or lighter than a D800 or D610 (and more expensive than the latter), so it's not much of a departure other than its design. The only interesting thing to me is the D4 sensor inside.
I still think the lack of video is a bad move, but the camera isn't much smaller or lighter than a D800 or D610 (and more expensive than the latter), so it's not much of a departure other than its design. The only interesting thing to me is the D4 sensor inside.
All style, no substance in my mind. Sure I get the retro styling thing but it seems to me like Fuji, Olympus or Sony did it better. They're bringing back solid feeling metal bodies, but they're adapting classic controls into something that's practical and ergonomic with the needs of digital. I kind of doubt Nikon's approach of having a dial for everything single thing on the camera. Especially as you'll need to use both hands to operate it, probably meaning you might have to remove your eye from the viewfinder. Lastly, I don't think it really looks good, the proportions of the camera are a bit weird and the plethora of buttons kind of reminds me of some 50's camera that also looked a bit wonky.
Anyhow, I guess you have to keep in mind that this camera isn't intended primarily as a professional's workhorse and a bit more as a rich guy's toy. IMHO, if you're so nostalgic of film cameras, you might as well use one. Though I do get that lots of modern cameras are kind of ugly...
Anyhow, I guess you have to keep in mind that this camera isn't intended primarily as a professional's workhorse and a bit more as a rich guy's toy. IMHO, if you're so nostalgic of film cameras, you might as well use one. Though I do get that lots of modern cameras are kind of ugly...
Oh, indeed, but the mechanics had been honed and were relatively compact (even with a Nikon) and there's really not a lot going on behind the mirror box. Ok there was film to fit in, but the batteries are tiny, there was no screen, no memory cards, far less controls. I'm sure they could make something similar in size to the FM/FE but it couldn't do everything we ask of a modern DSLR and have a full frame sensor... maybe one day!
Incidentally, I'd still recommend the film beasties for general shooting. They seem to keep on working, they're cheap, 'full frame' and if you take a decent shot you can always scan it!
This is the one I remember... new retro seems bulkier?
I had a couple of FE bodies back in the day: one for b/w, the other for colour transparency film. Great cameras. But that was then and this is now. I don't want novelty for its own sake, but I don't want pointless nostalgia either...
When Nikon is on the mark, they produce fantastic cameras. I think in many ways they missed the mark here, and above all, missed a fantastic opportunity. There are certainly a few things to like about the new Df - the D4 sensor is certainly one of them. The compatibility with even non-AI lenses another. It's nice looking (to me), and as everyone knows, that's the key indicator of producing great images
.
With the price-vs-features though, I can't convince myself that it's value for money. One card slot? Really? And while there's the compatibility with older manual focus lenses, there's no split-prism option for a focusing screen, which seems somewhat bizarre. Green dots just don't do it. Hobbled AF seems only done for spite. Too the hobbled shutter speed. The FPS seems hobbled too. The ergonomics of the manual controls and how much they get in the way remains to be seen.
Perhaps I'm being overly critical, but there does seem to be a large premium for the retro look-n-feel.
. With the price-vs-features though, I can't convince myself that it's value for money. One card slot? Really? And while there's the compatibility with older manual focus lenses, there's no split-prism option for a focusing screen, which seems somewhat bizarre. Green dots just don't do it. Hobbled AF seems only done for spite. Too the hobbled shutter speed. The FPS seems hobbled too. The ergonomics of the manual controls and how much they get in the way remains to be seen.
Perhaps I'm being overly critical, but there does seem to be a large premium for the retro look-n-feel.
Last edited:
US price with lens $3000
$3000 is roughly £1900 at today's exchange rate + Vat @20% that should be about £2300
and
Nikons Uk price is
£2750 !
Once again not impressed by Nikons UK pricing
and why is there no "body only" option available in the uk.
strange.
$3000 is roughly £1900 at today's exchange rate + Vat @20% that should be about £2300
and
Nikons Uk price is
£2750 !
Once again not impressed by Nikons UK pricing
and why is there no "body only" option available in the uk.
strange.
Photography for most of us is about aesthetics. I'd rather have a beautiful thing than an ugly thing. I've not seen a Df in the flesh, so I'm not saying it's a beautiful thing, per se, but I do think design and the way something looks is important. Obviously it shouldn't compromise usability but I would have thought Mac Rumors would the first place to understand that the middle ground can be a great place.
It's not as if Nikon have replaced the D800 with this - you can choose.
It's not as if Nikon have replaced the D800 with this - you can choose.
I'm not intrigued: the price is way too high to be of interest to most enthusiasts and it doesn't really tickle the retro center in my brain. It looks nice, but apart from the more retro UI, I don't see for what it has been designed, it's still a big full frame dslr which takes big lenses. It's completely unlike Fuji's X100s or X-Pro 1 where the retro look is not about style, but how to use them.
And the best thing about Fuji's cameras is that enthusiasts can afford them.
And the best thing about Fuji's cameras is that enthusiasts can afford them.
All of Nikon's pro-level cameras have buttons for almost every feature. Once you're used to the camera, you rarely have to take your eye off the viewfinder to change a setting, but if you don't have custom buttons you almost always do have to, so I think that one's not really an issue.
I like the non-battery operated bulb setting, but that's about the only thing I'd get excited about.
Paul
Yes pro Nikon bodies have buttons for everything, but not wheels for everything, so you need to hold a button while turning a wheel tp change some of the lesser used settings. That's fine and I think that's a better way of doing it than the Df with the exposure comp and ISO wheels being on the left, requiring you to at least change your grip if not remove your eye form the viewfinder to change those settings.
I'm fine with my glass. However, I don't know how Nikon has started to lag so very far behind Canon in terms of the quality of their camera bodies... but they have.
A 5DIII equivalent for Nikon would be a godsend, and instead, we get this retro crap.
Yours,
A Frustrated Nikon User
A 5DIII equivalent for Nikon would be a godsend, and instead, we get this retro crap.
Yours,
A Frustrated Nikon User
Out of interest, and not having not kept up with bodies I can't justify buying, what's wrong with a d800 or 610 vs the 5D iii? Has it not been the case in recent years that Nikon and Canon kind of fill in the gaps in each others lines?
I'm a Nikon shooter, but some of my best friends are Canon guys
. To me, there's not a huge difference (if any) in the body quality of the 5d iii and the d800. If you need 6 frames-per-sec rather than 4, 61 auto-focus points rather than 51, and you prefer Canon's ergonomics and image processor, then it might be the right one for you. Both produce great images, all things being equal. Me, I'm still in the way-back machine with my d300s
I'm a Nikon shooter, but some of my best friends are Canon guys
Both produce great images, all things being equal. Me, I'm still in the way-back machine with my d300s
That's what I thought. To me this camera is part of the process of camera makers trying to differentiate themselves on something other than megapixels. The market for cameras is declining for various reasons, so they need something new (or old) to push. I find it interesting that people whine so much about cameras, but I don't see photographs getting better and better with each generation. There are still only a few really good artists.
I have an OMD EM5 which is a retro camera from the original OMD series. I love it.
When I saw Nikon was going to do something similar I was intrigued as I've owned Nikon DSLRs before. What they released was underwhelming. I think they took the retro design too far made a camera that was large bulky.
Like the Nikon F2 that was linked, is a sleek camera. I think they over-designed the product never mind priced it out of reach of most people
When I saw Nikon was going to do something similar I was intrigued as I've owned Nikon DSLRs before. What they released was underwhelming. I think they took the retro design too far made a camera that was large bulky.
Like the Nikon F2 that was linked, is a sleek camera. I think they over-designed the product never mind priced it out of reach of most people
If I shot Nikon, I'd be interested.. Full frame retro is desirable.
However, in not a Nikon...
Come on Pentax. Where is your full frame retro?
However, in not a Nikon...
Come on Pentax. Where is your full frame retro?