# Rumor: Nikon Digital FM2 - Retro look



## verysimplejason (Oct 21, 2013)

From Nikonrumors:

Some additional specifications of the upcoming full frame retro styled Nikon digital camera:

Standard F-mount
Pentaprism viewfinder (meaning the camera will not be mirrorless)

The camera will meter even with non-AI lenses down to full aperture
The camera will ship with a new special edition Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G lens to match the look/design of the body
The camera will have physical controls and excellent build quality (which explains the 765g weight)
Expeed 3 processor
Same sensor as in the Nikon D4
Nikon calls it a "hybrid" camera - not sure what exactly they mean with that
The announcement most likely will take place in the next 1-3 weeks

When are we going to see something similar from Canon? I'm hoping for a digital AE-1. It'll be truly amazing. I'd gladly trade my new 6D for something like this even if it only has an AF similar to 60D and a 1DX sensor for a price between 6D and 5D3.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 21, 2013)

I'm not sure where it fits in the lineup. Another D610 or a D800 with retro design and fewer pixels?? I guess we'll find out how it fits in before long. It could just be a Japan only big dollar limited edition model.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 21, 2013)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> I'm not sure where it fits in the lineup. Another D610 or a D800 with retro design and fewer pixels?? I guess we'll find out how it fits in before long. It could just be a Japan only big dollar limited edition model.



It could be... but with Nikon, I can see that they're becoming more and more aggressive in trying to obtain a large chunk of the market. They might have a lot of shortcomings but still they try to cover and expand their market more and more. Fitting 1D4 sensor in a lower priced model and the retro look? Now that's truly nice of them.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Oct 21, 2013)

This is a very interesting/nice development ... I really wanted Canon/Nikon to come up with a full frame DSLR mirror less coz I'd feel a lot more comfortable in investing in Nikon gear than Sony ... if Canon does not announce something similar I'll happily buy the Nikon FF mirror less ... but if Canon announces one before the Nikon is available for purchase I'll wait for Canon ... and I don't really care if its a retro design or not as long as it is relatively small size with small prime lenses ... putting zoom lenses or bigger lenses on mirror less cameras defeats the purpose of "small form factor".


----------



## Pi (Oct 21, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> Fitting 1D4 sensor in a lower priced model and the retro look? Now that's truly nice of them.



One more camera with a better sensor than any Canon. This is becoming depressing.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 21, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> This is a very interesting/nice development ... I really wanted Canon/Nikon to come up with a full frame DSLR coz I'd feel a lot more comfortable in investing in Nikon gear than Sony ... if Canon does not announce something similar I'll happily buy the Nikon FF mirrorless ... but if Canon announces one before the Nikon is available for purchase I'll wait for Canon ... and I don't really care if its a retro design or not as long as it is relatively small size with small prime lenses ... putting zoom lenses or bigger lenses on mirror less cameras defeats the purpose of "small form factor".



I'd really love a digital AE-1. I don't really care much if it's mirrorless or dslr. As long as it has the look, IQ and competitive price, it'll be one thing to consider.  It's like somebody revived Elvis. ;D


----------



## wickidwombat (Oct 21, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> From Nikonrumors:
> 
> Some additional specifications of the upcoming full frame retro styled Nikon digital camera:
> 
> ...



I hear ya 

perfect recipe for canon
- take an AE1 body 
- call it the AE-1D
- put all the 1Dx bits inside dont leave all the goodies out
- price in between the 5Dmk3 and 1Dx
- maybe have to drop the shutter speed down a bit but who cares
- watch the preorder list grow massively

I dont really care about a new sensor


----------



## zlatko (Oct 21, 2013)

Pi said:


> verysimplejason said:
> 
> 
> > Fitting 1D4 sensor in a lower priced model and the retro look? Now that's truly nice of them.
> ...



What sounds interesting about this camera is the design, not the sensor (which will no doubt be excellent).

Canon sensors are the current whipping boy of online photo gear forums — repeatedly whipped in thread after thread. However, at a recent assignment, there were 2 photographers and 2 videographers all using Canon DSLRs — I'm guessing we had about a dozen Canon DSLRs in total (+ lots of Canon lenses and a Sigma or two). The sensors performed and no one was depressed about them. As Ming Thein wrote in his recent post on the Fuji X-E2, "Enough of specs: we’re all aware that _cameras passed the point of sufficiency some time ago_. Haptics and handling are far more important criteria determining whether a camera stays with you and becomes a partner or a hinderance."
http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/10/18/review-the-2013-fujifilm-x-e2/


----------



## EchoLocation (Oct 21, 2013)

this camera sounds truly amazing. i'm very excited about this. i'm a little worried that it weighs 750g!!! I really hope that the price is reasonable(below 3k, hopefully around 2k.)
This is an extremely exciting camera and i'm definitely going to consider canceling my Sony preorder for the a7 and lens. in fact, i'm almost definitely going to cancel my Sony if this thing is close to what is described and under 3000 bucks.
Since i've been looking at the Sony i've been a little worried about the lack of native lenses, lack of AF with adaptors, the large and expensive LE A4 adaptor for A mount lenses, and now the reviews saying RF lenses perform poorly on the a7. 
I love the 16mp sensor idea!!!! I really hope it has something special to make MF easier(split prism,etc), and I really hope the price is not like 4k!!! 
If Nikon can deliver this camera for a great price it is going to be huge!


----------



## zlatko (Oct 21, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> I hear ya
> 
> perfect recipe for canon
> - take an AE1 body
> ...



The AE-1 was a relatively inexpensive camera, popular for its price, size and automation. It demonstrated a cost-cutting philosophy (plastic top & bottom with a chrome look). If updated to digital, it would not be priced between the 5D3 and the 1DX. What would it give us over, say, a 6D? A smaller, lighter body ... about the same weight as a T5i / 700D but with a full-frame sensor. 

This new Nikon is rumored to be 765g, or about the same weight as a 6D. It will be interesting to see if Nikon has been able to shrink the body size to something like the original FM/FE. That would be a nice size. 

The rumored "hybrid" part of the design is very interesting and mysterious at the moment.


----------



## Aglet (Oct 21, 2013)

Certainly does sound like a fun product that could possibly kick serious butt!
However, for those looking away from Sony's recent A7/r ... 
What's the register distance for the A7?... is it short enough to handle adapters and a variety of other makers lenses? If so, makes a very versatile imaging back end compared to an F-mount.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Oct 21, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > This is a very interesting/nice development ... I really wanted Canon/Nikon to come up with a full frame DSLR coz I'd feel a lot more comfortable in investing in Nikon gear than Sony ... if Canon does not announce something similar I'll happily buy the Nikon FF mirrorless ... but if Canon announces one before the Nikon is available for purchase I'll wait for Canon ... and I don't really care if its a retro design or not as long as it is relatively small size with small prime lenses ... putting zoom lenses or bigger lenses on mirror less cameras defeats the purpose of "small form factor".
> ...


I still have an AE-1 and an A1...both great slrs for their time. But the current entry level xxxD camera is better specced and better featured than even the A1, let alone AE-1. The closest thing we've seen to an AE-1 was the original 300D. The modern comparison would be a 6D...and that's a far superior camera than anything from the 70's and 80's (even superior to the mighty T-90). Such is progress.

I'm not that fussed with hybrids / ragefinder / mirrorless cameras. They have their place in the market, but I like a true optical viewfinder which looks though the lens. It's the joy of DSLR's and a key feature. Yes it makes the camerea heavier, yes it adds bulk and yes it causes an enlarged distance from the rear of the lens to the ensor to accomodate the mirror mechanism...but it's just SO much nicer to use.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Oct 21, 2013)

GMCPhotographics said:


> I like a true optical viewfinder which looks though the lens. It's the joy of DSLR's and a key feature. Yes it makes the camerea heavier, yes it adds bulk and yes it causes an enlarged distance from the rear of the lens to the ensor to accomodate the mirror mechanism...but it's just SO much nicer to use.


+1 ... but also like mirror less cameras they are very convenient to carry around anywhere like my EOS-M ... but I do wish there were a lot more small prime lenses for them - like the 22mm f2 pancake lens. For me a full frame mirror less camera with small 24mm f/2.8 + 50mm f/2 + 100mm f/2.8 pancake sized lenses would be one killer setup to easily carry anywhere.


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 21, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> GMCPhotographics said:
> 
> 
> > I like a true optical viewfinder which looks though the lens. It's the joy of DSLR's and a key feature. Yes it makes the camerea heavier, yes it adds bulk and yes it causes an enlarged distance from the rear of the lens to the ensor to accomodate the mirror mechanism...but it's just SO much nicer to use.
> ...



+1. It's almost the same as my current lens lineup. Yes, I'll be happy if there are pancake versions of these lenses. Hopefully development of EVF will be better in the coming years. I always think that together with the pancake lenses, it will be the key to eventually get a good share of the DSLR market. AF will be another area where it should display some improvement.


----------



## zim (Oct 21, 2013)

wickidwombat said:


> perfect recipe for canon
> - take an AE1 body
> - call it the AE-1D
> - put all the 1Dx bits inside dont leave all the goodies out
> ...




Take AE-1 and replace with F1n...... even more perfect ;D


----------



## SPL (Oct 21, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > This is a very interesting/nice development ... I really wanted Canon/Nikon to come up with a full frame DSLR coz I'd feel a lot more comfortable in investing in Nikon gear than Sony ... if Canon does not announce something similar I'll happily buy the Nikon FF mirrorless ... but if Canon announces one before the Nikon is available for purchase I'll wait for Canon ... and I don't really care if its a retro design or not as long as it is relatively small size with small prime lenses ... putting zoom lenses or bigger lenses on mirror less cameras defeats the purpose of "small form factor".
> ...


Hilarious! I have an AE-1 Program that I used for years and would love to see that happen. I would love to see Canon do a retro body/rangefinder style with a full frame sensor and a EF mount for my glass collection


----------



## preppyak (Oct 21, 2013)

zlatko said:


> This new Nikon is rumored to be 765g, or about the same weight as a 6D. It will be interesting to see if Nikon has been able to shrink the body size to something like the original FM/FE. That would be a nice size.


Actually, size wise, this camera is rumored to be the exact size of a 6D.

Rumored Camera: 765g, 143.5 x 110 x 66.5mm
6D: 755g, 144.5 x 110.5 x 71.2 millimeters.

For comparison, the Sony A7 is: 474g, 127 x 94 x 48 mm

edit: Ah, I see it doesnt appear to be mirrorless. That makes it a really odd camera, as the ergonomics of a lot of the old cameras are awful compared to modern ones. Maybe they are trying to pump this out cheaply to compete with the A7?


----------



## unfocused (Oct 21, 2013)

I can't decide if this is a brilliant cutting edge move on Nikon's part or a pathetic attempt to squeeze dollars out of the camera collector market by recycling old designs and old components.

It seems like it could go either way.


----------



## zlatko (Oct 21, 2013)

preppyak said:


> zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > This new Nikon is rumored to be 765g, or about the same weight as a 6D. It will be interesting to see if Nikon has been able to shrink the body size to something like the original FM/FE. That would be a nice size.
> ...



Interesting. In that case it will be taller and deeper than the FM/FE camera bodies. Deeper probably to accommodate an integrated hand grip with space for a battery.


----------



## Cali_PH (Oct 21, 2013)

Aglet said:


> Certainly does sound like a fun product that could possibly kick serious butt!
> However, for those looking away from Sony's recent A7/r ...
> What's the register distance for the A7?... is it short enough to handle adapters and a variety of other makers lenses? If so, makes a very versatile imaging back end compared to an F-mount.



Yes, it can handle adapters for Nikon, Leica, Canon etc. There are already videos on youtube of people testing pre-production models with 3rd party lenses, such as the 17-40L, with working autofocus. Also, Samyang has announced that they'll be releasing 5 lenses for the Sony FE mount (14mm f/2.8 ED AS IF UMC, 24mm f/1.4 ED AS IF UMC, T-S 24mm f/3.5 ED AS UMC, 35mm f/1.4 AS UMC, 85mm f/1.4 AS IF UMC). 

Also, given that Sigma has their lens mount swapping service, I wouldn't be surprised if they came up with their own FE mount.


----------



## SiliconVoid (Oct 21, 2013)

Cali_PH said:


> Aglet said:
> 
> 
> > Certainly does sound like a fun product that could possibly kick serious butt!
> ...



In reading comments here and other forums regarding the new Sony body, I do not think people realize how crappy AF performance is going to be using other lenses than the new Sony lenses.. That realization along with the plethora of older 3rd party lenses will mean - manual focusing - which is even crappier using an EVF.. Mirrorless bodies are neat and all, certainly a means of access to more lenses than any one manufacturer ever dreamed of, but it is of limited benefit and not a functional substitute for an OVF and dedicated AF sensor.

As for the excitement over body size... all any manufacturer needs to do is drop pop-up flashes, drop 3.x" displays, drop the gadgetry that provides no benefit to actual photography (GPS, WiFi, etc) and maybe even ditch video recording (though that does not effect camera size other than another button, but is less than ideal with a ~2" lcd) and there would be plenty of room to shrink the body size around a FF sensor, mirror, and OVF.

In reality it is the average consumer today wanting any gadget they think will take the photo for them and tell everyone else they were there that prevents manufacturers from producing small foot print DSLRs - - NOT the current technology.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 22, 2013)

Wonder if Canon going to have something like this? as a fun camera: 

----------------------------------------------------------------
Rumor Dimensions & weight: 143.5 x 110 x 66.5mm (765g)

Vs

5D III - 150 x 110 x 76mm (860g)


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 24, 2013)

Some updates:


Will be called Nikon D4H
Will use EN-EL15 battery
3" LCD Screen
EVF/OVF hybrid viewfinder
Can be used with true mirror lock up for non-AI lenses while still allowing viewing through view finder.
New hybrid mechanical shutter
No AA filter
No video in low power mode but otherwise it will have video (?)
Expeed 3A processor
Price: $3,000 for body only, $3,300 for a kit with the new 50mm f/1.8G lens
Black, Black/Sliver and Chrome version will be available

There's also a video on it right at Nikonrumors. Looking nice but expensive.


----------



## eml58 (Oct 24, 2013)

Probably come with an optional Oil throwing shutter mechanism.

Immediately followed by the D4H/10 

Sorry, couldn't help myself.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 24, 2013)

Nikon - Pure Photography #1

"in my hands again" .. oO  

reminds me of the Oly Pen clips 3 years ago, with Kevin Spacey - "don't be a tourist". ;-)


----------



## verysimplejason (Oct 24, 2013)

I like a chrome version of a digital AE1 with same specs as a 6D but a little bit AF and priced just a little bit above 6D. If that's the case, my 6D would immediately go on sale.  I don't know but I love the design and grip of some old cameras. It seems I'm missing the chrome finish from my dad's Yashica fx 103. I shot with it till the circuit board got fried. I was told it's better to look for another one rather than fix it.


----------



## moreorless (Oct 24, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> Wonder if Canon going to have something like this? as a fun camera:



The problem I'd say would be that Canon is limated by the mount switch to EOS, Nikon not only has a lot of manual lenses on the second hand market but actually still produces a lot of the AIS lenses.

I'm guessing when/if Canon release an EVF/OVF viewfinder SLR it'll be much more geared towards video.


----------



## AcutancePhotography (Oct 24, 2013)

I share some of the concerns that are being posted on the Nikon forums: What is Nikon's intent with this camera? What niche is it trying to fill?

Is it aimed at photographers who like the retro look and want a walk around street camera? Is Nikon trying to take some of the retro business from Leica?

It sounds like an interesting camera. But before I can make any comparision to other cameras, prior to purchase, I would like to know more about this camera.


----------



## unfocused (Oct 24, 2013)

unfocused said:


> I can't decide if this is a brilliant cutting edge move on Nikon's part or a pathetic attempt to squeeze dollars out of the camera collector market by recycling old designs and old components.
> 
> It seems like it could go either way.



If the rumored price is correct, I'm inclined to now go with my second assessment.


----------



## Dylan777 (Oct 24, 2013)

verysimplejason said:


> Some updates:
> 
> 
> Will be called Nikon D4H
> ...



One question: when Canon will have something like this? Man, I love the RETRO/CLASSIC/VINTAGE look 

As a Canon shooter, I'm little jealous here :-X


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Oct 25, 2013)

According to Nikon Rumors the "D4H specifications posted yesterday were 100% fake". According to the new info the camera will be called Nikon DF (apparently DF stands for "Digital Fusion") ... check this out at: (http://nikonrumors.com/2013/10/24/the-name-will-be-nikon-df.aspx/)


----------



## zim (Oct 25, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> One question: when Canon will have something like this? Man, I love the RETRO/CLASSIC/VINTAGE look
> 
> As a Canon shooter, I'm little jealous here :-X



Me too, would look right at home round my neck;

RETRO - yip 
CLASSIC - mmm, well maybe not 
VINTAGE - yip

I have absolutly no doubt Canon will get into this market... in about 5 years time just as futuristic/contemporary comes into style


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 25, 2013)

If you really want to go for that old school, just replace your EF's with ZF's or Samyangs and set your cam to Tv or M

Nothing like an aperture ring and MF to bring back the nostalgia.

Maybe even push the boat out and fit a split prism / microprism ring focus screen.

Similar user experience, or is it all about the look?

To be fair, I am guilty of this, the only film cameras I would seriously consider buying these days would be an FM2 or FM3, a Contax G2, or a Minolta CLE. And mainly for the aesthtics of being seen using them, if I'm honest. I might get a fixie bike whilst I'm at it. And large rimmed glasses.


----------



## moreorless (Oct 27, 2013)

+1 on your gig tonight?

I'm guessing that besides that and appealing to former users of older camera's it might also be a response to size saving.

If the camera is going to have a form factor similar to the F3 then that isn't going to leave room for a top plate LCD, you dump that and marked dials are going to give you similar info without having to look at the back screen or the viewfinder.


----------



## MrFotoFool (Oct 27, 2013)

The fact that it (reportedly) has no video mode is reason enough to buy it.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 27, 2013)

No video mode? Did they rip out live view as well?

If not it's only a magic lantern hack away.


Heres a thing, as much as I lived handling the nikon fms fas etc when I was selling them, ergonomicslly they are horrid. The new plastic rubber grip af style bodies may be souless and disconnected, but they do rather fit the hand well. 

I used a minolta sr-t303 very regularly up until around five years ago, loved the winder the finder the wind on, but on a cold day and generally, not all that nice in the hand.


----------



## moreorless (Oct 28, 2013)

From the latest video it does look like theres some kind of grip, looks similar but larger to the F3's.


----------



## weixing (Oct 28, 2013)

Hi,
Hmm.... just wonder will they remove the rear LCD to complete the retro look... 

Don't really care about the retro look... anyway, 20 years down the road, my 6D will be the retro look camera... if it's still working. 

Have a nice day.


----------



## AvTvM (Oct 28, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> No video mode? Did they rip out live view as well?
> If not it's only a magic lantern hack away.



Not if Nikon really does as promised in video teaser #3 "No clutter. No distractions".

Fairly easy to cut the video clutter on a DSLR
* no microphone built in
* no microphone jack
* no headphone jack
* no HDMI connector, just USB 2.0 
* no red "record-video" button
* hardware incapable to pipe through uncompressed video, only low-quality stream for live view 
* proprietary hardware and software that ML or others cannot hack for another 10 years

I'd salute them for that. Would be the frist DSLR in a long time witghout threads from video-guys demanding audio levels and zebars and this and that. What a relief.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Oct 28, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Not if Nikon really does as promised in video teaser #3 "No clutter. No distractions".
> 
> Fairly easy to cut the video clutter on a DSLR
> * no microphone built in
> ...



Hardware incapable... so a slow system bus? 
No USB 3.0?
Proprietary hardware and software... yeah, cause hackers tend to obey such orders.

Anyway, it's camera that I'm not going to buy so it can have or not have whatever, just a shame that because some folk don't use video that some feel nobody should use video. I don't use PIC or averaged spot metering, maybe I could save a few bucks if canon would make a camera just for me without these features.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 2, 2013)

Going by the latest pics, there appears to be a shutter dial, but no aperture ring on the kit lens.. curious ommision.

I know F mount, AF-D etc.. just seems odd to push a retro body with an electronic iris.


----------



## Woody (Nov 2, 2013)

US$3000 and 750g.

How is this going to compete against Sony A7/A7r?


----------



## MrFotoFool (Nov 2, 2013)

Woody said:


> US$3000 and 750g.
> 
> How is this going to compete against Sony A7/A7r?



1. No one really knows the price. The 3K is just speculation as far as I can tell.

2. It will compete because there are *A LOT * more Nikon users with lenses invested than there are Sony users with lenses invested.


----------



## sanj (Nov 2, 2013)

weixing said:


> Hi,
> Hmm.... just wonder will they remove the rear LCD to complete the retro look...
> 
> Don't really care about the retro look... anyway, 20 years down the road, my 6D will be the retro look camera... if it's still working.
> ...



 True


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 2, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> Anyway, it's camera that I'm not going to buy so it can have or not have whatever, just a shame that because some folk don't use video that some feel nobody should use video. I don't use PIC or averaged spot metering, maybe I could save a few bucks if canon would make a camera just for me without these features.



We are talking about - possibly, maybe - the first current DSLR (1) to not have video. Out of what, 2 dozen current DSLRs which all are "video-enabled" or even "video-optimized" (especially Canon). In a market, where (an estimated) 80% of DSLR-purchasers do NOT capture video AT ALL. Other than possibly a short "test clip" after purchase. We are not talking about "a camera only for me or for you". We are talking about strills-optimized cameras for the majority of stills-only photographers. Video-folks have PLENTY of choice. No need that EVERY camera has to be "video-enabled" or "video-optimized". Especially when a camera's basic construction principle (mirror flapping in lightpath) is absolutely "not optimized" for video capture. 

As far as the upcoming Nikon is concerned, I am not interested. To me it appears to be a butt-ugly downscaled D610 with a last generation low-resolution sensor. Fixed shutter-time dial on top instead of a much more useful and ergonomically placed multi-purpose thumb wheel (as on any other decent DSLR). Plus a retro-version of a lens that boasts an absolutely functionless chrome ring. But let's wait and see, if Nikon is going to offer more than much ado about nothing.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 2, 2013)

AvTvM

Would you like a camera without live view?
If so I'll get you canons product development address and you can write to them.

The 1DC is the only Canon DSLR that I can imagine as being described as 'video-optimised' and thats a niche product for a niche market where I imagine 100% of users will want the video (or they'd just buy a 1DX)

You have it all wrong mate. The technologies being developed for video users will have a dividend for stills users, and if you don't fancy them, hey, don't use them. I just don't buy this arguement that video detracts from the stills capability of DSLR's.

I suggest you don't buy a 1DC. Otherwise, just get out and enjoy your photography, your obsession is verging on the autistic spectrum now.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 2, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> AvTvM
> 
> Would you like a camera without live view?
> If so I'll get you canons product development address and you can write to them.
> ...



I love to use liveview for static subjects and when my EOS 7D is on a tripod. 
Liveview is exactly the amount of video useful in a stills camera and for stills shooters.

And I will not buy a 1DC, don't worry. However, I would like all video guys to buy video cameras and/or the 1Dc, because its for them. And not pestify regular DSLRideo crap and demands for ever mor zebras, headphone jacks, steroeo micropühones, better video codecs, marked-in-red "start video" buttons and whatever else. And whatever the videots say, I know, that the overwhelming majority of DSLR users see it exactly the same way and never use video capture. They are just not as vocal about it.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 2, 2013)

I use my DSLRs for video - ML does what the Philip Bloom wannabes want, it's not a stock canon feature.
Zebras etc can be added on external monitors also.

I've not asked for either. Ok. a headphone socket would be really really really nice, but my beachtek (at extra cost to me, not developed by canon or detracting from canons work) largely solves the problem.

Video is 99% live view.

It's really not worth going on so much about.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 2, 2013)

paul13walnut5 said:


> I use my DSLRs for video - ML does what the Philip Bloom wannabes want, it's not a stock canon feature.
> Zebras etc can be added on external monitors also.
> 
> I've not asked for either. Ok. a headphone socket would be really really really nice, but my beachtek (at extra cost to me, not developed by canon or detracting from canons work) largely solves the problem.
> ...



No, Video is NOT 99% live view. Video on a DLSR means a sensor which is compromised because it is "optimized" to being ON for 30 minutes at a time and longer. Not needed for liveview or stills. Video is about all sorts of awkward hardware and firmware manipulations on a DSLR that are not needed for stills capture or even in the way. Video means, R&D funds are misappropriated for something only a tiny minority ever uses in a DSLR, rather than being directed at the issues, Canon should be solving and which would be beneficial to the overwhelming majority of stills photographers: fully competitive sensors! Vastly improved DR at low ISO! Far less banding/noise, better S/N at high ISO!

Personally, I really don't understand why you and other avid videographers are not buying a true videocam. If I was into video, I would definitely NEVER EVER put up with ANY DSLR to capture video. Not even a 1Dc. I'd rather buy a C500 or something along those lines then. And I would beat on Canon to sell those video gagdets at more reasonable prices. Since obviously lower price is the sole reason why people would ever consider buying large sensored DSLRs and (ab)use them to capture video. 

If Nikon brings their new DF DSLR without video, that will be the only feature about it, that I will commend them for. Otherwise I don't care for that camera not at all. I hate retro looks on modern gear, whether it be cameras or cars.


----------



## Policar (Nov 2, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> paul13walnut5 said:
> 
> 
> > I use my DSLRs for video - ML does what the Philip Bloom wannabes want, it's not a stock canon feature.
> ...



Given that video was first introduced as a gimmick enabled by live view (on the D90 and the Mark II), I'm pretty sure it _is_ 99% live view. The only camera that's been in any way "compromised" by it is the Mark III, to the extent that the resolution was designed to downscale conveniently to 1080p. That's about it. That and the 1DC. (Not the 1DX.) In fact Canon has pretty terrible video relative to some of the competition! They certainly haven't compromised stills performance for video, despite the fact that Mark II and 7D sales were driven STRONGLY by their video features.

Sony's advantages in sensor tech are not related to a lack of video. The D800 has video. The Alexa IS a video camera. They all benefit from superior dynamic range because Sony has better sensor fabs and has patents on on-chip ADCs that Canon refuses to license.

But yes, I would rather have a C500 than a 7D! I would not, however, rather BUY a C500. It's $30,000. If anything including video helps dSLRs be more competitive and drive a larger base to buy them, making them cheaper for still photographers.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 2, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Video means, R&D funds are misappropriated for something only a tiny minority ever uses in a DSLR, rather than being directed at the issues, Canon should be solving and which would be beneficial to the overwhelming majority of stills photographers: fully competitive sensors! Vastly improved DR at low ISO! Far less banding/noise, better S/N at high ISO!



And hey, guess what, these would also benefit video! 



AvTvM said:


> Personally, I really don't understand why you and other avid videographers are not buying a true videocam. If I was into video, I would definitely NEVER EVER put up with ANY DSLR to capture video. Not even a 1Dc. I'd rather buy a C500 or something along those lines then.



I'm not an avid videographer, I am a cameraman and editor with Europes largest publishing company. My work is on TV as part of programmes or as commercials on a regular basis. If you see an advert for the Mirror, People, or Daily Record etc then I've probably had some kind of hand in it.

As such I have access to or own a number of cameras, from GoPros to XDCAMHD's. DSLRs and HDV in between.

I'm currently deciding what to replace our ENG with, another ENG or a large sensor camera, such as a C100 or BMD (thus my interest in m43 lenses and attendance at the OM seminar) ENGs are great for some jobs. DSLRs are great for some jobs. GoPros are great for some jobs. iphones are great for some jobs. You use the tool for the job. I'm not suggesting to anybody that a DSLR is the be all and end all, and I doubt any fellow professional would accept such advice.




AvTvM said:


> And I would beat on Canon to sell those video gagdets at more reasonable prices. Since obviously lower price is the sole reason why people would ever consider buying large sensored DSLRs and (ab)use them to capture video.



I'll send them an email just now. 'Dear Canon, please sell your gadgets at more reasonable prices. Fanks. Love Paul'.

I'll let you know how I get on.

Here's some other reasons:

Choice of lenses, particularly lenses like Tilt Shift, where the effects are difficult to otherwise replicate.
Compact form. Saves my back from breaking. Discreet.
They work. Better than any other cameras for some situations.
Large sensor look is difficult to achieve on other cameras at similar prices. Yeah we could use the old red rock mounts with interted mirrors etc, but em. Naw. Naw thanks.




AvTvM said:


> If Nikon brings their new DF DSLR without video, that will be the only feature about it, that I will commend them for. Otherwise I don't care for that camera not at all. I hate retro looks on modern gear, whether it be cameras or cars.



You see you call it retro. Some might call it functional. Aperture rings and shutter dials work fine with gloves in the cold winter. Electronic dials can be hard to manipulate in the cold.

We lost these external controls because of electronic operation, i used an SR-T up until 5 years ago and still miss it. I spent most of my time looking though it rather than at it. It wasn't a design or fashion statement.

Retro for retros sake alone is a bit naff (new minis, new beetles) but some things are just classic and I prefer to think of them as a relaunch. The thing with making a blanket statement is that there are exceptions to every rule.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 2, 2013)

rumored 3000$.... without video? no way?

yeah.. well.. thanks but no thanks.

from the logic some here have developed.... this camera has to be dirt cheap.. because it has no video.
for how long we have heard "canon give me a DSLR without video. i don´t need video and i don´t want to pay for it". :

im curious how cheap this "no video" nikon is.

and yes, it makes sense to congratulate nikon for NOT INCLUDING features in camera. sarcasm off

as if the missing video features will make the camera a better photographic tool. ;D
but im sure some twisted minds here will find a way to explain why that makes absolute sense.
i still prefer to have a feature and make no use of it 90% of the time, then missing a feature when i may need it.


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 2, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> In a market, where (an estimated) 80% of DSLR-purchasers do NOT capture video AT ALL.



source?


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 2, 2013)

MrFotoFool said:


> The fact that it (reportedly) has no video mode is reason enough to buy it.



nomen est omen? 

so let´s say there are two identical models except one has video functions, the other not.
both cost the same.. you buy the one without video features. that´s what your saying?

you can not just ignore the video features?
there is a inner voice that forces you to do video when it´s available? 
or what is the problem you have with video features on a DSLR?


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Nov 3, 2013)

I can't remember ever waking up in the morning and thinking "Gee, what a nice day to go shoot a video", 
but do enjoy the morning walks with a still camera looking for a new perspective or a simply wonderful
sight. My canon lenses are like old friends and have been carefully selected for tasks that I enjoy. I don't
need all the "bells and whistles" of the current cameras - not a selection of 21 "scenes", video capability,
or whatever. I'd really like a camera body where canon disables all the "stuff" they think users want, and only 
give me good, fast autofocus and low light performance. Course, if they're going to take out 75% of the
"function", they probably could lower the price by 50% and we'd all be happy.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 3, 2013)

Disables.

Like the 10d in a plastic shell the revolutionary rebel.

Why disable. Why not just ignore?

There is light that makes me want a camera, sometimes a video camera, sometimes a still camera.

I call this photography lark a broad church. Others may call it a broad chapel. A broad mosque. A broad synagogue. A broad temple.

Whatever you call it, can we have less doors?


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 3, 2013)

OMG ... we are talking image capturing gear here, not religious stuff.

Why can't video folks not understand and accept the fact, that a very substantial segment of the market wants cameras for "pure stills photography". At a price significantly lower than cameras offering "stills and video capture"? Why do videogrpahers expect stills photographers to just put up and shut up and pay for the video capture crap in any camera, including any DSLR? 

If the Nikon DF will really be "pure photography" only, without "videography" [=video CAPTURE] and comes at a price siginificantly lower than the Nikon D610 ... it will be a BIG SUCCESS. 

If Nikon would offer the DF at an "incredible" 999 USD/Euro it would be a HUGE SUCCESS like the "Canon digital rebel" in 2003 re-visited. This time by the team in yellow and ... in full frame. 36x24mm - as it was always meant to be for "pure photography". Not 16:9 or some other ugly towel-shaped TV/video format. And Canon would really take another hit. Would love to see how stupid they'd loook with all their expensive stills-AND-video stuffed-down-your-throat-DSLRS. I'm afraid, Nikon is not smart enough either to make the DF a true and "Pure stills" home run. 

And .. even a pure-stills "FF-rebel" Nikon DF at 999 would be the last hugely succcessful Nikon DSLR before mirrorless cameras of the Sony A7/R type quickly kill off all "affordable" DSLRs [= up to USD 2000]. 

If Nikon charges more for the DF than for the D610, it will be just another niche product that will sell very poorly. 

hehe!


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 3, 2013)

You've yet to convince me that any camera that has video is compromised for stills, or video adds substantially to the cost (over live view, which was introduced on the e330, no video, and canons 4od, no video)

I know a few medium format guys who would challenge your 6x4 'pure photography' claim.

I've a dolution for you: go buy and EOS 3.

Cheap. So called full frame. An image capture device with resolution throretically as high as you can sample it (i got 40mp scans from my minolta 5400 scan elite) and greater dr than most dslrs depending on the film you use.

No overheating. No live view. Just pure photography.


Or you could, yawn, JUST NOT USE THE VIDEO FUNCTION on your current DSLR.
'


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 3, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> If Nikon charges more for the DF than for the D610, it will be just another niche product that will sell very poorly.
> 
> hehe!



Which unfortunately is likely to happen if they put in their best AF module, rugged body, etc. Though this is likely to create a contraddiction with the supply of a revamped 50mm 1.8 as kit lens. 

The unclear thing at the moment is: who is this camera for? Consumers are unlikely to fall for it, and enthusiasts need some considerable perk to put aside their D600/D800. I liked the rumour of hybrid viewfinder because it would have made this camera very good with manual focus lenses - not only Nikon, but also Zeiss, Samyang and Voigtländer - though it seems that it's not going to happen.

I like the idea of a camera that has no video and concentrates on stills, but as Paul Walnut said, I need to be convinced that removing video is actually going to give me an advantage in term of still photography. Otherwise it's just poor marketing.


----------



## Policar (Nov 3, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> OMG ... we are talking image capturing gear here, not religious stuff.
> 
> Why can't video folks not understand and accept the fact, that a very substantial segment of the market wants cameras for "pure stills photography". At a price significantly lower than cameras offering "stills and video capture"? Why do videogrpahers expect stills photographers to just put up and shut up and pay for the video capture crap in any camera, including any DSLR?
> 
> ...



They will charge more for the DF than the D610, because it is a niche product, because it lacks major features like... video.

$999? Get real.


----------



## atvinyard (Nov 4, 2013)

I don't care if it has video or not. I think the real story here is going to be the form factor and ergonomics. I've been trying to figure out why we haven't seen a smaller form factor full frame. I just wish it would have been an Olympus.


----------



## ShootingStars (Nov 4, 2013)

If it doesn't offer video, and it's not <$1500 because it doesn't offer video, Canon still wins


----------



## Woody (Nov 4, 2013)

ShootingStars said:


> If it doesn't offer video, and it's not <$1500 because it doesn't offer video, Canon still wins



Yup.

Nikon wants to appeal to their base of stawart fans. This will also test those folks who claim they don't care about video and all they want is better photographic tools. Now, let's see how big this group is... I suspect it is VERY small and the DF is going to be another misfire, like the Nikon 1.


----------



## moreorless (Nov 4, 2013)

Woody said:


> Mikon wants to appeal to their base of stawart fans. This will also test those folks who claim they don't care about video and all they want is better photographic tools. Now, let's see how big this group is... I suspect it is VERY small and the DF is going to be another misfire, like the Nikon 1.



I suspect that taking out video is also a way to differentiate this camera from the D4 that looks like it'll have the same season. Nikon lost a lot of D3 sales to people buying D700's instead and I'd guess that's not something they want to repeat.

To me it looks like Nikon is trying to target a lot of niche markets at once...

Those after a smaller FF system
Existing Nikon FF users looking at a smaller second camera
Owners or buyers of old manual lenses
Those after the retro look/control system


----------



## Woody (Nov 4, 2013)

moreorless said:


> To me it looks like Nikon is trying to target a lot of niche markets at once...
> 
> Those after a smaller FF system...



If the rumors are correct, the DF weighs 750g. Doubt it's going to be small and light...


----------



## sanj (Nov 4, 2013)

What does 'pure photography' imply? To me, it means no video. Could be wrong though...


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 4, 2013)

sanj said:


> What does 'pure photography' imply? To me, it means no video. Could be wrong though...



Just an ad run by Nikon )


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 4, 2013)

Woody said:


> ShootingStars said:
> 
> 
> > If it doesn't offer video, and it's not <$1500 because it doesn't offer video, Canon still wins
> ...



Nikon 1 has not been a misfire. Not long ago production couldn't keep up with demand. Eventually market saturation occurred and sales went drastically down. The underwater version seems to be a good way to revamp the system - it's what "weather sealing" should actually mean and I'm interested in a camera that costs less than most underwater casings alone.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 4, 2013)

Here's my take on it: the DF will be the most successful Nikon FF camera to date.

Forget the 'Retro" label, that's just Nikon trying to avoid eating humble pie over it's years of dreadful design. The DF isn't going to be that different to a 6D apart from the addition of a physical shutter speed dial. OK, maybe no video, so what ? Of all the people I know who have dslrs and are not specifically videographers or movie makers, non have used the video function after the initial 'wow look at this fantastic quality video' effect has worn off, and they revert back to the camcorder that is much more suited to video of the kids. 

I always said that ever since Nikon changed the logo to make it look as if it had had one too many, _Nikon_ lost the plot with their cameras, trying to have all bases covered to suit anybody and everybody. They've finally realised that the vast majority of FF users do not want pop up flash, they want sound ergonomics in a sensibly sized quality body, producing the highest possible _perceived _ IQ, and a 16 mp sensor is going to work just great for that. They want a crystal clear OVF with no translucent LCD murking the image up which Nikon have been doing for years, and even Canon joined that game with the 5D3 and 7D. ( Yes wait for the 5D4, it will loose the translucent crap and have interchangeable screens ). If Nikon are talking about 'pure' photography I can't see this camera having a hybrid viewfinder as this must reduce the OVF quality.

Price wise I guess this will be more expensive than the D610 ( or maybe it will be the D620 by the time the DF is launched ) as it will be a higher quality product, made in Japan instead of farmed out to cheaper countries as so much of the rest of Nikon gear is.

If Nikon have finally managed to get their designs back on track they may have something worth having, like the original FM, at the time of its introduction called 'the worst Nikon ever' by some trade press, yet went on the become the most enduring designed slr in the history of cameras. 

Here's a shot of mine. It was the first camera I ever bought new, and despite the fact that I went on the use FM2, FE2 and F3s I never had the heart to sell this one !


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 4, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Here's my take on it: the DF will be the most successful Nikon FF camera to date.



YES! But only IF ... Nikon sells the DF for USD/€ 999,- ... full-format "digital rebel" DSLR. hehehe, just like in 2003 Canon's APS-C DSLR! It will then be the last Nikon DSLR to sell more than 1.000.000 copies, before mirrorless FF Cameras quickly retire all DSLRs to where they belong ... camera museum. 

NO! IF Nikon tries to sell it for more than even the D610. Then they'll be selling a couple 100.000 copies only. And mirrorless FF cameras will still be taking over soon. 

hehe, I love it. No amount of Retro-crap and good-old-analogue-times nostalgia will be able to change this.


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 4, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> I always said that ever since Nikon changed the logo to make it look as if it had had one too many, _Nikon_ lost the plot with their cameras, trying to have all bases covered to suit anybody and everybody. They've finally realised that the vast majority of FF users do not want pop up flash, they want sound ergonomics in a sensibly sized quality body, producing the highest possible _perceived _ IQ, and a 16 mp sensor is going to work just great for that. They want a crystal clear OVF with no translucent LCD murking the image up which Nikon have been doing for years, and even Canon joined that game with the 5D3 and 7D. ( Yes wait for the 5D4, it will loose the translucent crap and have interchangeable screens ). If Nikon are talking about 'pure' photography I can't see this camera having a hybrid viewfinder as this must reduce the OVF quality.



Sorry - almost totally disagree.

1) pop-up flash is great. As with many other things, better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. The good course is not to remove it, but to enhance it. The RX100 has a tiltable head and even the iPhone 5S has two colors.

2) This camera is aimed exactly at having all bases covered and suit everybody. It will be the real D700 successor, something that D600 and D800 both failed to be. Ironically, something the 5D3 is.

3) I don't know about the 5D3, but the OVF of the D600 is big, bright and very clear. Too clear I would say, to work comfortably in MF at wide apertures. The green dot is unreliable when shooting wider than f/2.8.

4) For the tech level available today, I would say that the 24 MP Sony sensor is the best all-rounder out there. 28 MP would probably be perfect.

Talking about pure photography, to me it means solid build, great all-round sensor, great PDAF, high burst rate, HSS and great strobist options, high compatibility and focus support with MF lenses. Why not, Wi-Fi and GPS. 

As of today, I think Sony might be the first to produce such a camera.


----------



## Woody (Nov 4, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Here's my take on it: the DF will be the most successful Nikon FF camera to date.



NO WAY that is gonna happen if it weighs > 750g and costs US$3000


----------



## Woody (Nov 4, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> Nikon 1 has not been a misfire. Not long ago production couldn't keep up with demand. Eventually market saturation occurred and sales went drastically down. The underwater version seems to be a good way to revamp the system - it's what "weather sealing" should actually mean and I'm interested in a camera that costs less than most underwater casings alone.



Market saturation => overall market demand is low. The fact that DSLRs now outsell MILCs by 9:1 in N. America and Europe is proof of that. Misfire? Absolutely.

Underwater version is great. I love the idea too! But how many folks need underwater cameras... again a very niche market.


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 4, 2013)

Woody said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > Nikon 1 has not been a misfire. Not long ago production couldn't keep up with demand. Eventually market saturation occurred and sales went drastically down. The underwater version seems to be a good way to revamp the system - it's what "weather sealing" should actually mean and I'm interested in a camera that costs less than most underwater casings alone.
> ...



Market saturation is different from low demand. Low demand means no one is interested, market saturation means that many people might be interested but once they are satisfied there is no additional demand. That's a tricky one for manufacturers, that today are getting screwed because photography traditionally is not as fast paced a market as consumer electronics usually is. The edge of the 2 worlds is a very unpredictable and tricky territory.


----------



## Hillsilly (Nov 4, 2013)

Sporgon said:


> Here's my take on it: the DF will be the most successful Nikon FF camera to date.



As long as it is priced closer to $2k than $3k, I think you'll be spot on. Not only will it appeal to current serious photographers, but there is also a large number of older photographers who dislike the complexity of modern DSLRs. If it: -

1. Is simple to use, with a dial to change aperture, a dial to change shutter speed, and very easy method for changing ISO; 
2. Promises High IQ and fast AF;
3. Stays with a familiar SLR shape; and
4. Has a Nikon logo (ok, may not be Canon, but Nikon does appeal to many camera buyers...) 

I can't see how they can go wrong. I also think Canon should do something similar and provide a "DSLR for Dummies". Doesn't have to be a retro design, just simple to use with direct control of the key features. My Canon "DSLR for Dummies" would also have BIG buttons or dials. Do you know how difficult/annoying small buttons are for many older people to use?


----------



## MLfan3 (Nov 4, 2013)

simply no one wants to buy a digital camera without proper video and LV implementation.
I was hoping this DF thing to be a fully mirrorless design camera , but it seems like just another boring retro looking F mount camera.
so I cannot imagine any one actually wants this , Nikon is wasting its very limited R and D money on something no one wants to see from them.
shame on you Nikon, you should try to come up with something similar to the Sony A7 with better video codec and Nikon One type of very fast shooting capability with proper PDAF.


----------



## Dylan777 (Nov 4, 2013)

MLfan3 said:


> simply no one wants to buy a digital camera without proper video and LV implementation.
> I was hoping this DF thing to be a fully mirrorless design camera , but it seems like just another boring retro looking F mount camera.
> so I cannot imagine any one actually wants this , Nikon is wasting its very limited R and D money on something no one wants to see from them.
> shame on you Nikon, you should try to come up with something similar to the Sony A7 with better video codec and Nikon One type of very fast shooting capability with proper PDAF.



I might be the odd one, but I don't care about video crap on *CAMERA*


----------



## Aglet (Nov 4, 2013)

IT LOOKS GOOD!
I LIKE IT!

new photos show lots of manual controls on top deck

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/11/04/this-is-the-nikon-df.aspx/

maybe I'll buy one if it feels good and performs well (_low ISO, no FPN, high DR, etc_  )

edit - link anchor removal


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 4, 2013)

MLfan3 said:


> simply no one wants to buy a digital camera without proper video and LV implementation.


I do. Actually the majority of stills photographers do (source: personal observation + common sense). LV is fine and useful to us. Video capture? Unnessecary clutter and distraction. very "un-pure" [in Nikon lingo]. ;-) 



MLfan3 said:


> I was hoping this DF thing to be a fully mirrorless design camera , but it seems like just another boring retro looking F mount camera.
> so I cannot imagine any one actually wants this , Nikon is wasting its very limited R and D money on something no one wants to see from them.
> shame on you Nikon, you should try to come up with something similar to the Sony A7 with better video codec and Nikon One type of very fast shooting capability with proper PDAF.



I also would have loved to see a fabulous "all-out" Nikon FF mirrorless camera in response to Sony A7/A7R. 
One affordable version "STILLS ONLY" and one significantly more expensive version with video-capture, to be precise. Not because it is that much more expensive to make. But because I would love all those videogrpahrers to cross-subsidize my stills cameras ... big time! Rather than trying to free-fride on my stills cameras and clutter them with all sorts of video capture crap. 

If one camera replaces two dedicated cameras (stills + video), it should by all means cost more than a single-use device.


----------



## LarryC (Nov 4, 2013)

Dylan777 said:


> MLfan3 said:
> 
> 
> > simply no one wants to buy a digital camera without proper video and LV implementation.
> ...



You're not the odd one here.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 4, 2013)

Aglet said:


> IT LOOKS GOOD!
> I LIKE IT!
> new photos show lots of manual controls on top deck
> http://nikonrumors.com/2013/11/04/this-is-the-nikon-df.aspx/#
> ...



It looks awful, like all the "retro" stuff. It will only be successful, if it comes really cheap, way below D610.


----------



## Hillsilly (Nov 4, 2013)

MLfan3 said:


> simply no one wants to buy a digital camera without proper video and LV implementation.



But I've got a phone for taking videos. Why would I need my camera to do it, too?


----------



## Zv (Nov 4, 2013)

The black one looks OK but I'm not feelin the silver. Not that I would ever buy it. 

So, the hottest topic is a Nikon release. Man it's a slow week here, eh?


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 4, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> I also would have loved to see a fabulous "all-out" Nikon FF mirrorless camera in response to Sony A7/A7R.
> One affordable version "STILLS ONLY" and one significantly more expensive version with video-capture, to be precise. Not because it is that much more expensive to make. But because I would love all those videogrpahrers to cross-subsidize my stills cameras ... big time! Rather than trying to free-fride on my stills cameras and clutter them with all sorts of video capture crap.



Unfortunately it's probably always going to be the opposite. Consumers want video - and more features in general: pixels, GPS, wifi, etc. Deciding to leave video out involves a mature understanding of one's needs, and it's proper of the enthusiast/pro - thus the higher price.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 4, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > I also would have loved to see a fabulous "all-out" Nikon FF mirrorless camera in response to Sony A7/A7R.
> ...



I want liveview, image stabilizer, Wifi and GPS in my next camera. Because - unlike video capture - I put all of those features to good use in my photography. They help me to get and capture better images and share them with others with less effort. generally, they make my life much easier. 

I do NOT want or ever use video-capture. I do not want a retro/pseudo-mechanical, wheel-encrusted camera like the Nikon Df.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 4, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> It looks awful, like all the "retro" stuff. It will only be successful, if it comes really cheap, way below D610.


All Nikon has to do is hire you to tell them which product would be "successful" : incredible, who knew sales and marketing was that simple.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 4, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> AvTvM said:
> 
> 
> > It looks awful, like all the "retro" stuff. It will only be successful, if it comes really cheap, way below D610.
> ...



yep, good idea. ;-)
Sometimes it's really simple. Just watch and see how well this Nikon Df will sell if it is priced above D610.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 4, 2013)

AvTvM said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > AvTvM said:
> ...


OK, Prophet AvTvM


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 4, 2013)

could not care less about a retro looking camera.
all the knobs and dials... it looks like some steampunk camera. 

and retro gets lame fast....


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 4, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> could not care less about a retro looking camera.
> all the knobs and dials... it looks like some steampunk camera.
> 
> and retro gets lame fast....


 : : :


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 4, 2013)

Rienzphotoz said:


> Lichtgestalt said:
> 
> 
> > could not care less about a retro looking camera.
> ...



+1

The problem is that if you really really make the perfect camera and you price it nicely, it will be the last camera you're going to sell. Just look at how many Nikonians are still so happy with their D700/D3X/D300s that they don't feel the need to upgrade. Let's be honest, if the 5D2's AF wasn't crap and the 5D3's great, how many people would have upgraded?


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 4, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> The problem is that if you really really make the perfect camera and you price it nicely, it will be the last camera you're going to sell. Just look at how many Nikonians are still so happy with their D700/D3X/D300s that they don't feel the need to upgrade. Let's be honest, if the 5D2's AF wasn't crap and the 5D3's great, how many people would have upgraded?



It is evident, that there are LOADS of Canon and Nikon users who would LOVE to buy a great, decently priced [= around USD/€ 1500] 7D II and D400. But CaNikon are not willing and/or not able to get one out. 

Instead ... retro stuff. Hate it. Ugly, wheels & knobs all over. Don't want to be a steam engine operator. Had manual-focus stuff way back in the 70ies. Done with it. For good.


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 4, 2013)

I too don't like video on *camera*.
I like that retro but one thing throw me off is the slowest shutter speed was 4 seconds
if you want more, then go Bulb mode. Beside that, it is perfect


----------



## Aglet (Nov 4, 2013)

This isn't just retro looking for retro' sake.
Nikon makes 2-handed cameras. This looks to be an improvement in common control ergonomics over the bodies I've used. No fiddling with myriads of buttons all over; they're convenient but you need to spend enough time to know where they are and if you're wearing gloves... fuggeddabowdit!
These are nice big dials for ISO, EV comp, shutter, etc.

Canon did something similar but they called it a G11. 

If the ergos fit as well as they look, it's a good step. Looks like plenty of useful still features and no video hooey to clutter up Nik's not-so-intuituve interface or control layout.

I LIKE IT! 
it's be a little like going back to my old A-1


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 4, 2013)

Seperated at birth?


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 4, 2013)

When I first saw the OM-D i thought it was very cynical, appealing to users of the entirely different Om cameras with fond memories.

However, the OM-D is actually a treat to use. It shouldn't be called the OM_D or OM anything, but hey.

This Nikon is very pretty (the top half) but very cynical. Just don't know why you wouldn't just buy a regular Nikon DSLR if you were in the Nikon system.

Also, why a G lens? This deserves an AF-D surely?


----------



## RomainF (Nov 4, 2013)

Will be priced at *3.000$ with kit lens *(50 1.8 ) and 2700$ without. 

http://nikonrumors.com/2013/11/04/this-is-the-nikon-df.aspx/


----------



## And-Rew (Nov 4, 2013)

Aglet said:


> I LIKE IT!
> it's be a little like going back to my old A-1



And there you have it in a nutshell...

Not every one using DSL's were born in time only to use DSL's - many of us were around long digital had left the Sci Fi table ad enjoyed film - which in turn left many of us with a favourite "film" camera.

Yes, that's right - "film", capable of no more than 36 shots at a time and requiring no preview until development and needing the use of 'chemicals' to process a picture to look different to what would be produced from the negative (RAW for the younger members of the community : ).

Very often, people fell into a body and hardly changed from it, until it no longer worked and the cost of repair was more than raplcement - for me this was also the A1 - especially with the MD offering 5 fps (can you believe it - 5 fps in 1984?). But the overiding thing with all these camera bodies was their 'retro' look as it is called today.

But in truth - they were all designed to be fully functional and strangely, many of the 'retro' cameras are being picked up by those of us old enough to have used them. Simple truth is - we could set apaerture and shutter as easily as any modern computer controlled light meter can today and we could focus almost as quickly - but i have to admit the ability to 'track' subjects wasn't quite as convenient. Did i also mention that most of these 'retro' cameras could be carried in a pocket and not need a weekender bag to be lugged around in. They did not require a portion of the national grid in batteries to operate, and they did not come with loads of bugs that required multitudes of firmware upon release to put right the constant problems found after development.

That is why the camera in my pocket nowadays is a Fuji X-Pro 1 - in full manual mode. Yes, it really does go around in my pocket with its wonderful 35mm f1.4 lens (soon to be accompanied by the equally amazing 23mm f1.4 lens) and yes, my trips to the doctor with shoulder and back aches have ceased. As much as I love the 5D2, the X-Pro 1 really takes me back to those 'retro' days and puts a spark back into my photography.

It allows me to think, do, and be proud of the finished product - unlike the 5D2 that requires a bit of thought with the A/F - and ends up as not much more than a very large P&S that does everything for you.

Now, if Canon were to release a digital version of the A1 along with lenses of similar size with an A ring on the actual lens - well I'd be getting into fights with other old timers to be at the fron of the queue.

Boys, enjoy your toys - but don't 'dis' us older people who aspired to become masters of 'film' photography and the dark room.


----------



## RomainF (Nov 4, 2013)

Again and again, you guys who play on 5D3 or 1Dx and who are looking for a tiny camera that fits in a pocket without compromising your IQ, i recommend you to have a look at Leica's... Once you get the way the manual focus works, it may even be faster and more accurate than an AF camera.
And if you enjoy the retro-look, you'll be happy forever with your Leica under you jacket.


----------



## duydaniel (Nov 4, 2013)

RomainF said:


> Once you get the way the manual focus works, it may even be faster and more accurate than an AF camera.



1) Leica iq sucks at high iso
2) manual focus can be faster and how many shot you miss?


----------



## Lichtgestalt (Nov 4, 2013)

NR reports it will cost 2750$

that price will make a lot of nikon fanboys unhappy.
they hoped it will be cheaper then the D610.


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 4, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> NR reports it will cost 2750$
> 
> that price will make a lot of nikon fanboys unhappy.
> they hoped it will be cheaper then the D610.



I am just laughing my head off. I fully expected Nikon would price it higher than even the D800. Nikon Df .. or rather: the new Nikon DOA. lol.

Hope this cures Canon of any and all "retro-crap" plans they may have. Go and build my FF mirrorless now!


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 4, 2013)

Lichtgestalt said:


> NR reports it will cost 2750$
> 
> that price will make a lot of nikon fanboys unhappy.
> they hoped it will be cheaper then the D610.



Fanboys are actually the only ones who are going to buy it. It's about all others that I would worry.

This camera, at this price, is just an EPIC FAIL.

Someone at Sony's opened a good bottle tonight.


----------



## RomainF (Nov 4, 2013)

duydaniel said:


> RomainF said:
> 
> 
> > Once you get the way the manual focus works, it may even be faster and more accurate than an AF camera.
> ...



1) You're right. I wouldn't say "sucks" but it ain't good above 3200, i concede.
2) I don't miss no shot anymore. For the first weeks, i've been missing lot of shots, but therefore my hit-rate is about 100%. It's only about practice.


----------



## preppyak (Nov 4, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> This camera, at this price, is just an EPIC FAIL.
> 
> Someone at Sony's opened a good bottle tonight.


Agreed. Hell, you can almost get two Sony's for that kit price.

Unless it's got something truly magical, I don't see the reasoning behind this for Nikon. It's not really noticeably smaller than a D610, and yet it costs 40% more? Especially after updating the D600 with the "basically just a price increase" D610, its a series of odd moves from them.

If Sony can fill out a lens lineup in the next year or two, they are golden


----------



## unfocused (Nov 4, 2013)

Two initial comments:

Funny that when Nikon decides to emphasize image quality they use a 16.2 mp sensor. First in the D4 and now in the Df. Gee, maybe those high megapixel Nikons and Sonys aren't as great as DXOMark seems to think.

And, all those who complain about having to "pay" for video can have their non-video camera and save themselves some money...looks like $50 off the D800. Knock yourselves out.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 4, 2013)

preppyak said:


> If Sony can fill out a lens lineup in the next year or two, they are golden



I think Sony would be quite happy for you to adapt your existing lenses. Sony inhereted Minoltas lens division, and otherwise have used ziess designed or canon produced lenses in their camcorders and compacts..

Sony ain't that into making lenses. NEX has been around for a good few years now and SHOULD be whipping up a storm as their bodies are pretty good, and interchangable lens large sensor camcorder that handles and operates like a camcorder, for very modest money. Why don't they rule the world? The same reason they don't make their own lenses for the F65 etc.

I wouldn't hold your breath for any interesting Sony lenses. Look out for adaptors.


----------



## Hillsilly (Nov 5, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> This camera, at this price, is just an EPIC FAIL.
> 
> Someone at Sony's opened a good bottle tonight.


It's only one model in their line-up. Even if it doesn''t turn out to be a huge success, good on them for trying. I like seeing camera companies doing new things, even more-so when they know that it won't appeal to the mass market. And Canon's no stranger to this. Just look at the 60Da. Despite all of the doom and gloom about DSLR makers, to me the 60Da suggests that Canon does look to niche markets and tries to supply what people want.

Nikon have done exactly the same. They've identified that a lot of people want simplicity, and this is their take on it. And I think it should do well.

I'm also surprised/exicited to see that everything (including ISO) is controllable manually (if using a lens with an aperture ring). While I'm not really a "retro" design person, I know I prefer direct access dials to buttons, LCD screens and menus, and I suspect I'm not the only one. Another big positive for this camera.


----------



## dolina (Nov 5, 2013)

I would like to see Canon make a competing model.


----------



## sanj (Nov 5, 2013)

sanj said:


> What does 'pure photography' imply? To me, it means no video. Could be wrong though...



I was right!


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 5, 2013)

dolina said:


> I would like to see Canon make a competing model.



no thanks. I would rather like to see Canon make a killer 7D 2 and a Sony A7R-killer.


----------



## pulseimages (Nov 5, 2013)

unfocused said:


> Two initial comments:
> 
> Funny that when Nikon decides to emphasize image quality they use a 16.2 mp sensor. First in the D4 and now in the Df. Gee, maybe those high megapixel Nikons and Sonys aren't as great as DXOMark seems to think.



I know a guy that has a D800E and the images are amazingly detailed but he doesn't care much for the plastic feel of the body.


----------



## RAKAMRAK (Nov 5, 2013)

dolina said:


> I would like to see Canon make a competing model.



Me too..... come on Canon.... give us DAE1


----------



## RAKAMRAK (Nov 5, 2013)

Hillsilly said:


> Albi86 said:
> 
> 
> > This camera, at this price, is just an EPIC FAIL.
> ...



Canon will give us DAE1.... someday....


----------



## Woody (Nov 5, 2013)

Too heavy, too expensive and no video.

A sure misfire!


----------



## aj1575 (Nov 5, 2013)

NO! Again, Nikon now also has a small FF camera, with retro look, like Sony has. Olympus has also cameras that look like they did 20 years ago. Canon is again lacking behind, I will switch to something else than Canon, just because, and anyway, Canon will go down if they continue like this....


Well, actually I don't mind if canon doesn't have such lifestyle products. These are mainly overpriced toys for photogeeks. At first I liked this retrowave (like when the new beetle came out, and all these other retro cars), but now it is time for something new. I like to see new more revolutionary approaches to camera design in the DSLR range. So far everything "new" is just an implementation of new tech in old designs.

These cameras offer nothing more (actually less) than a normal DSLR, but cost still a lot (actually too much for the specs), mainly because of their looks (toys for photogeeks with too much money to spend)


----------



## sharka23 (Nov 5, 2013)

Woody said:


> Too heavy, too expensive and no video.
> 
> A sure misfire!




*misfire????*
*---> misunderstood!!!!*

too heavy???: its a camera not a toy: have you ever got a 1d in your hands?? or a hasselblad?
even a 7d is heavier - and for sure not better - sorry i need to say

too expensive???: ok its not cheap, but it is probably the d4-sensor, so it is in not far away(in quality) of the 1dx - 
and it will work perfectly for lowlight!! 

and yes it is not a videocamera - finally.

and as a canon fan, its hard but I need to say: it is very good looking!


for all you grudger out there: acceppt it, its a great, good looking camera, unfortunately not branded with CANON.


----------



## Albi86 (Nov 5, 2013)

sharka23 said:


> for all you grudger out there: acceppt it, its a great, good looking camera, unfortunately not branded with CANON.



I'm a Nikon user too, and many folks around here know I have no love for Canon (nor any other brand). They are manufacturers of tools and I am the customer and the user of those tools, that's all as far as I am concerned. 

This camera had all the chances to be a successor to the adored D700. It failed in one thing: the AF system. You can't put in a 3000 USD camera the same AF module as the D5300. You can't have the cheapest prime as a kit lens. You can't say "no distractions" while asking people to buy a wi-fi module, a gps module, etc etc.

Also, as far as the sensor is concerned: the D4 has less MP because is a photojournalists' camera and they don't care about high MP count as much as high fps. I have no knowledge that the D4 sensor offers any better IQ or is more expensive to produce - actually I would say the opposite. If someone is more informed in this sense please let me know. I have to say, I would have liked the 24 MP sensor much much better.

It's yet another example of a camera that was close to be fantastic, yet is not, and you wonder what made Nikon overlook such fundamental aspects. The camera ends up feeling like a fashion accessory for loaded vintage-loving hipsters and nostalgics. That is, more a marketing novelty than a photographic one.


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 5, 2013)

I would guess the D4 sensor could be cheaper as it was developed in house as opposed to being a Sony. 

Maybe they havent sold as many D4s as forecast and have some spare sensors in stock...........

Agreed; the D4 is about speed and convenience. A Press camera really.


----------



## MLfan3 (Nov 5, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> Rienzphotoz said:
> 
> 
> > Lichtgestalt said:
> ...



+100, all agreed.


----------



## sharka23 (Nov 5, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> sharka23 said:
> 
> 
> > for all you grudger out there: acceppt it, its a great, good looking camera, unfortunately not branded with CANON.
> ...


_

really the AF of the 5300 ??? that´s a little embarrassing.
at least something that´s no good...

and yes, if I would like to have such a camera, i would prefer the 24MP sensor(d3x) too.
but in low light it will be unbeatable.


----------



## aj1575 (Nov 5, 2013)

Albi86 said:


> It's yet another example of a camera that was close to be fantastic, yet is not, and you wonder what made Nikon overlook such fundamental aspects. The camera ends up feeling like a fashion accessory for loaded vintage-loving hipsters and nostalgics. That is, more a marketing novelty than a photographic one.



+1

exactly what I think. 

And hey, for 3000$ you also get a specialy designed 50mm f1.8 lens (this is like getting a plastic toy with a happy meal...). This is not a great camera from the technologigal point of view, it is just a great camera marketing wise; small FF with retro style, this is hip at the moment, and there are enough people with $ out there who like to be a photojournalist and buy this camera for 3000$.


----------



## verysimplejason (Nov 5, 2013)

This DF turned out to be sexy but priced a little bit higher than expected. It got what a still camera should really be but Canon can really have a better camera by just making 6D's look a little bit retro and improving its AF. Just let all points to be double-cross type and EV -3 sensitive and it'll be more joy to use. I have no problem with 6D's current sensor for stills though a little bit of improvement especially in low ISOs won't hurt.


----------



## GMCPhotographics (Nov 6, 2013)

I think that amoung the trendy pro / semi pro wedding photography shooters...this new Nikon will go down a storm. It looks great...it seperates a cosmetic "arty real shooter" from the masses (guests with pop up flash cameras and f5.6 lenses). It looks cool and I have to say Quodos to Nikon for that...yes I'd love a retro DSLR like that from Canon. It's lower MP and higher native ISO ability is a serious consideration for that large niche too. 
Canon have made the best Wedding camera ever, the 5DIII (developed by one fo the world's leading Wedding photograpehrs - Jeff Ascough). Its features are honed for that market and it's a fantastically versatile camera as a result. 
Nikon's approach is quite cleaver....same market (and one which they pretty much abandoned after the D7000) but appeal to the look and feel of a trad user. Priced directly against the 5DIII and a complete contrast to Canon's offerings. I think it'll sell really well.

On a personal note, I have always prefered the look and feel of dedicated dials over a menu driven UI. That said, I've made the latter work for me over the last 15 years or so....


----------



## AvTvM (Nov 6, 2013)

GMCPhotographics said:


> On a personal note, I have always prefered the look and feel of dedicated dials over a menu driven UI. That said, I've made the latter work for me over the last 15 years or so....



Really depends on shooting style. 7 dedicated dials "for everything" cluttered over a camera ... are "usable" but not great, when all the shooting situations ever encountered are exactly like what the guy in the Df teasers does: 
* casually look at STATIC scene only
* look at camera ... not at the scene 
* twist all requisite wheels ... and don't forget to unlock them before every turn
* look through viewfinder, frame your shot 
* take shot ... stretching finger uncomfortably up high to reach shutter release 
Any other shooting situation = a lot of lost shots. For people with normally developed dexterity it is not easily possible to hold camera plus possibly heavy lens, look through viewfinder and rotate up to 7 locked dials, requiring right and left hand. Would you really want to try that while shooting a wedding? Your kids playing? Your dog running? A really interesting street scene happening this very moment - and only NOW! - before your eyes?

With a good, current UI - like the one found on every Canon EOS DSLR with 2 wheels [=better than a rebel] and only a few buttons, all accessible with only the right hand, it is not necessary to use the menu system at all or to look at the camera, unless one wants to. 
* see any scene - including fast moving action
* take camera to the eye, look through viewfinder
* quickly set all shooting paramters with right hand only - using front wheel/thumb wheel/very few buttons, all very intuitive and easy to memorize, all relevant settings visible in viewfinder 
* take shot 

Nikon's current DSLR UI is already more "retro" than Canon's. And it works very well too, but requires more practice/routine to really master it. Most recent tweaks were not for the better [AF-mode selection]. The pseudo-"retro" UI on the Df is a disaster. Luckily it will bite only the pseudo hipsters buying it.


----------



## Rienzphotoz (Nov 6, 2013)

I Like it!
(Below Photo is from the email Nikonrumors had sent today)


----------



## Grumbaki (Nov 7, 2013)

This buttons would make much more sense if there was some kind of mechanical link to move one when you action the other in P/Av/TV mode (with priority settings).

I don't know if I'm clear or if I can even be clear on that 

There must be a better UI floatting in the noosphere...


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 7, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> This buttons would make much more sense if there was some kind of mechanical link to move one when you action the other in P/Av/TV mode (with priority settings).
> 
> I don't know if I'm clear or if I can even be clear on that
> 
> There must be a better UI floatting in the noosphere...



Like the FA. The FM2 +3 had aperture priority. But then, they also had lenses with aperture rings. This frankenstein does not, not as standard at any rate.


----------



## sanj (Nov 7, 2013)

Grumbaki said:


> This buttons would make much more sense if there was some kind of mechanical link to move one when you action the other in P/Av/TV mode (with priority settings).
> 
> I don't know if I'm clear or if I can even be clear on that
> 
> There must be a better UI floatting in the noosphere...



Yes you are clear. But since most lenses will not have aperture ring, when you change the ISO and or shutter, the appropriate changes will be made. I think.


----------



## RomainF (Nov 9, 2013)

I've tried it at the Paris photo show.
I've learnt the "photo" on Nikon F ; Nikon F2 ; Nikon FM ; Nikon FE. I currently shoot Canon (of course....) and Leica. You actually control the speed of a Leica with a wheel. With the DF in my hands i felt "home sweet home". These movements are for me more than natural. Get the camera, frame your shot, adjust exposure with your index finger if needed and press the shutter once the speed is the good one. It only require a few time, it is in fact really fast.
That's definitely not a 1Dx alike or a 5D3-hostile as I've read on this forum. These first two cameras are designed for speed with a beast of an AF and give you a total fast control on all of your exposure-data (ISO ; f/ ; speed). You can, as a matter of fact, alternate between strong backlight, very bright and really dark contexts in a very few moments. That's what you must have when you're a photojournalist working on lot of celebs entering and leaving a restaurant at noon on a sunny day. But when photographing family events and any regular situation without drastic exposure variations and whithout fast moving subjects, you don't _need_ that speed-abilities. That's why Canon sells the 6D so well. And I don't know the Nikon-line but I think that the brand new DF is suited for that kind of events.

Once your aperture is set to define your "atmosphere" (f/1,x for shallow DOF ; f/4 for focus assurance ; f/5,6-f/8-and-more for everything in focus), the ISO adjusted, changing the speed is fast IF needed. You don't change your ISO that often. I find that's a great mistake not to offer an aperture ring on the dedicated-50mm. It would have been an extraordinary combo if only....
Moreover i consider it is extremely over-priced. People paying 3000€ for a camera usually don't pay a lot of attention to the look of the camera. They want performances, reliability and great UI. 
(1) Professionals don't wanna look fancy, that's for a lot of them, a nightmare : *fancy is not related to serious *in most people's mind. When people hire a photographer for corporate events for their company they want him to "look pro". They are paying, and they often pay a lot of money, they don't want him to look fancy-funny-with-a-so-cuty-vintage-camera. Nevertheless, I can imagine that there is more place for experiment in wedding photography cause it's more related to a creation-arty-world.

(2) On the other hand, there's the great amateur, "expert" or however you call him. He enjoys a lot photography, he loves it and enjoys hearing "hey, here comes the professional" when he meets his friends. He wants to look like a pro in a discreet way. He likes how a big black dusky camera looks. It is just like his friends pop-up-f/5.6-lens-kitted-camera but bigger. And he likes that. Different but not so much. He's really involved in photography. Seriously.
He usually shoots great pictures, is happy with his gear and he just wonders if the next camera will be that great in ISO to change his actual one or if it is really a good idea to buy another bizarre-prime.

(3) On another hand, there's the regular guy. He likes taking pictures. He know some stuff like ISO's (he remembers that he used to buy 400 ones ten years ago) and shoots his family smiling, his friends and the great landscapes he sees when traveling or going in the land on sunday to have a lunch with the in-laws. He usually shoots "P-mode".
He's related to the guys who likes the "photography" and is in a more "arty-approach" but doesn't involves that much. He shoots some good pics, have a "his-name-photography" facebook fan page and loves when people tells him that he should become a pro because his "sunset is amazing". He wants very sharp pictures even though he doesn't really get why some pics are and some aren't. 

(4) And then there's everyone else. People only wanting to get souvenirs of events, who doesn't care at all about IQ. Their phone is the perfect tool cause pics are shared at the same time with all their friends, mates and family. That's the only thing they care about. There is also the kind people buying a 100D or 450D because "having a DSLR is so cool" which is quite the same. They shoot the green-box-mode.

I'm not saying that one are better than the other. I just note what come through my mind while writing this post. There is obviously a lot of different kinds of photographers, different way of seriously enjoying photography, of making a living of it.... But i consider that these are the biggest and most general "categories". 

I think that people who could be interested in a serious-and-retro-super-cool-looking cameras are the third category of people. But they don't have 3000€ to spend for that. That's why i consider that it is overpriced a lot. 
I think that people buying 3000€ cameras will buy it whatever it looks. It they like how it looks, it's a good point but not a decisive argument. They may hesitate between the 2200€ and the 5000€ one but they are wondering if they really need the 61-points-AF or the 14fps ability, not which one is the best looking.


Well. When I had it in my hands, ive enjoyed it. All the wheels are not so bad to deal with, you just have to get used. I d'ont think it is that bad, really not : unlike what the teasers shows, it is fast and easy to change the speed via a wheel.
The AF (on a 28 1.8, the new 50mm was not available) seemed to be quite fast and accurate. There was no memory card so i was unable to really appreciate the high-iso-IQ. I was more interested in the UI and i've been satisfied although i found it to appear a bit "cheap". It ain't solid metal like an old NikonFM...
I won't spend 3000€ for the DF, never. It would have been 1000€, yeah, why not, I've a dozens of old (and really old) Nikkor. It would have been a digital-manual-focus-camera, juste like my Leicas. But it's not for me....and I don't really get why people would actually buy it if it ain't that better than the D610.


----------



## verysimplejason (Nov 9, 2013)




----------

