A New DSLR not HDSLR from Nikon.....so no video mode, Nikon DF

Razz16mm said:
Some of us old farts are skilled enough not to need all the electronic crap.
Click to expand...

In general I'm fine with that. But it's not an argument to buy this camera. This camera still has all the electronic crap you mention - just not video. And it's not smaller or lighter or cheaper.

Dan Pears said:
I'm no expert but why is the price so crazy? It has the sensor of the D4 which goes for close to $7,000 in Australia. If this takes D4 stills $3,000 seems alright.
Click to expand...

Because that's not how the component costs shake out. The D4 sensor is no more expensive than any other FF35 (in fact, with fewer photosites, it might be simpler and a little cheaper). 100% of what you're paying extra for when you buy a D4 is absent from this camera.
 
Lee Saxon said:
In general I'm fine with that. But it's not an argument to buy this camera. This camera still has all the electronic crap you mention - just not video. And it's not smaller or lighter or cheaper.



Because that's not how the component costs shake out. The D4 sensor is no more expensive than any other FF35 (in fact, with fewer photosites, it might be simpler and a little cheaper). 100% of what you're paying extra for when you buy a D4 is absent from this camera.
Click to expand...

Looks to me like it has every capability the D4 has except video for half the price plus support for legacy lenses the D4 doesn't. In short, a premium top line dedicated stills camera.

Having the all the automatic electronic features is fine. Having them functionally in the way when you don't need them is not.
 
Whats with all the hate here? If you don't like it, no one will force you to buy it.
Getting the same quality as Nikon's D4 at half the price sounds like a pretty good deal to me. That sensor kicks ass.

Most pro photographers don't care about video and that's exactly the market they're aiming for. I say go Nikon.
 
Razz16mm said:
Some of us old farts are skilled enough not to need all the electronic crap.

Sometimes a single purpose tool that is perfectly optimized for one function is superior to a compromised multi-purpose device that does a mediocre job and is more difficult to use.
Click to expand...

You are Nikon's target customer for this camera. But you're still getting the electronic crap that you think you don't need. Nikon is just cutting features out to make you think you're getting more. You're not getting better photographic quality without video capabilities since the video is usually little more than software and minor components.
For the record, I don't hate this camera. I just don't have any Nikon glass and think the camera is a little expensive for what it doesn't do. If I was a wealthier amateur photographer with no interest in video and a bunch of Nikon glass, then I might consider it.
 
joe1946 said:
The 36MP Sony A7r cost $450 less than the DF, has 1/8000 sec shutter, is much smaller and has detail on par with the 40MP Pentax 645D MF. BTW the A7r also has video mode ;)

36MP A7r images :
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3797/10549831816_15ff6e63a5_o.jpg
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5522/10337184266_b6f9a37751_o.jpg

36MP A7r vs 40MP Pentax 645D :
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3727/10689460756_2279208f5e_o.jpg

View attachment 78236

View attachment 78237

View attachment 78238

View attachment 78239
Click to expand...


While it may be an advantage for some to have a smaller body and more MP....others will enjoy the larger Nikon body with it's excellent dial layout and ergonomics. Not to mention the sensor will be a DR and low light champ. I am among those who actually prefer a camera with a bit of heft and size.
 
Razz16mm said:
Looks to me like it has every capability the D4 has except video for half the price plus support for legacy lenses the D4 doesn't. In short, a premium top line dedicated stills camera.
Click to expand...
BlackWolf said:
Getting the same quality as Nikon's D4 at half the price...
Click to expand...

Inferior meter module from a lower end model, inferior autofocus module from a lower end camera, inferior mirror return system / motor drive (frames per second) from a lower end model - behind even the D610, inferior/smaller viewfinder from a lower end model, much smaller battery from a MUCH lower-end model (D5300), tiny top LCD with much less information available at a glance, no ethernet for tethered shooting, no illuminated controls (which matters more on this camera than on the numerous others that lack this feature - good luck with those dials at night), significantly inferior build quality and weather sealing comparable to a lower end model. In many of these cases the "lower end camera" appears to be the D600/D610.

Whether you'll miss the absence of any of those things is of course subjective. What isn't is that this camera made entirely of all off-the-shelf Nikon components, and not even their best ones, is massively overpriced.
 
Can't argue with the fact it's a top sensor and in a smaller body than the D4 (although still big and weighty). Not sure about the locking dials, that's a minus point to me as you can't adjust easily or at all while looking through the viewfinder. Nikon are taking a bit of a gamble with this model. Are there enough purists/enthusiasts to buy it at that hefty price? It will be interesting to see how available they are to buy as they could have a lowish production run initially. Wouldn't be surprised if the price drops a fair bit if demand is lower than hoped. My feeling is that it's primarily a collectors/trophy piece which is also an alternative for stills shooters who want the D4 sensor at a lower price, and are willing to sacrifice the more sophisticated electronics you get in the D4, as suggested by Samuel H. Nevertheless, fitting old Nikon glass (including non-AI) is a nice option. But as far as this forum is concerned the no video function means it's a non-starter, unless of course there is a surprising firmware update, but Gordon Laing at Cameralabs doesn't think this would be possible. There's no microphone/mic jack anyway so pretty sure Nikon have no no intention to offer video mode at a later date: http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_Df/
 
Last edited:
Samuel H said:
It's top sensor with inferior everything-else.

Many photogs have been asking for that: top IQ, no need for anything else.

Except, the sensor in the A7r is really, really good. Basically on par with the one in the D4, but with a lot more pixels.
http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Comp...rand2)/Nikon/(appareil3)/767|0/(brand3)/Nikon
Click to expand...

I compared the low cost 20MP Sony A3000 ($398 w/18-55mm ) with the $6K 16MP D4 @ 100 and 1600 iso and here is what it looks like :

A3000 vs D4 @ 100 iso:
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5550/10675590346_61c921cb88_o.jpg

A300 vs D4 @ 1600 iso :
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3767/10676487114_ec81b5532e_o.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top