Am I the only one who used and liked the Df here?
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
I had one for about 6 months. I liked it a lot. Loved the output. Only sold it to try out the new (at the time) Fuji X system.
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I was Canon then Fuji when they were new and were too expensive for a toy camera. I've gone to a Nikon Z 7 and have a couple f mount lenses so it might be a more sensible purchase now. They still are pretty pricey for a used camera.
olakiril
Well-known
Very true, but somehow Fuji & Leica have found a good balance and a large enough target audience.
You touched a sensitive matter. And partly answering jsrockit's question, I wanted the Df to be an FE2 with digital sensor squeezed in. Small, simple with an OVF that is a pleasure to use. What we got instead is a large camera with an average OVF (even for DSLR standards). But of course as you say "retro-inspired" means something different to everyone.
Even not perfect I would still like to try it and probably would enjoy it as well but not ready to spend too much money on it. Df cameras hold their value extremely well though, which indirectly indicates being a relatively successful model.
That was the problem with the Df, they did that marketing campaign that made us think we were getting a digital FM2 with a focus on manuals focus and instead it was a retro style D610 with the D4 sensor. If they had just released it without the stupid campaign it would have been better received. That said, it was unrealistic to expect a manual focus dslr in a film camera body. It hasn’t happened ever, so I’m just not so sure they can make a skinny dslr and most people like autofocus and modern gadgetry. That’s where mirrorless and the current industry struggles might help. They have to start getting creative by and forget these me too cameras.
Corran
Well-known
The DF should have at the least had interchangeable screens or a screen more readily used for manual focus lenses, and the ability to use non-AI lenses. That would've been actually cool and I likely would have bought one. Also they nixed the video for literally no reason and since I use my Nikon DSLRs for pro video work that was something I could just not live with personally.
And yes, count me in for wanting a Nikon SP digital. I know it's not going to happen.
But if they could shove the guts of a Nikon mirrorless (full frame only!) into a Nikon SP body or something close to it, with the normal Z mount and adapters to S and F mount, it'd be a winner. I'd prefer an RF focus mechanism but I could accept an EVF as a compromise. No hump though.
And yes, count me in for wanting a Nikon SP digital. I know it's not going to happen.
But if they could shove the guts of a Nikon mirrorless (full frame only!) into a Nikon SP body or something close to it, with the normal Z mount and adapters to S and F mount, it'd be a winner. I'd prefer an RF focus mechanism but I could accept an EVF as a compromise. No hump though.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
The Df is designed to use non-Ai lenses by flipping up a little tab on the mount. And I believe there were eventually alternate focusing screens available from 3rd party manufacturers.
Archlich
Well-known
The fact that 1. focusing screens are not available from Nikon; 2. swapping the screens isn't a straightforward process shows the weird limitation, or should I say hesitation in the Df's implementation.
It's clear from Day 1 that it's...not a very focused camera, despite the front and top exterior design suggested.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Corran
Well-known
I guess I forgot that the AI tab a la Nikon F3 / F4 was implemented on the Df.
But ditto about the screens. I don't want an off-brand screen, I want a good screen from Nikon designed to work with the camera and their mf lenses (that are still sold new today!!)
But ditto about the screens. I don't want an off-brand screen, I want a good screen from Nikon designed to work with the camera and their mf lenses (that are still sold new today!!)
hap
Well-known
they would just outsource the design and manufacture of the screens and brand them "Nikon" anyway.
Corran
Well-known
Congratulations and welcome to manufacturing in the 21st century. Doesn't change what I said.
Range-rover
Mentor
I have a SP, and I don't think it has a horrible viewfinder what's wrong with it?, I use it and enjoy it.
peterm1
Mentor
People buy "throwback"" or "retro" cameras because they like the retro vibe. Which, to a significant extent, is about "look and feel". Some companies have done it well - Olympus is the stand out in this regard.
But this camera body does not look to me like an old camera. It looks like something some millennial dreamed up in a design class to try to look like his interpretation of an old camera. It's a wannabe. Perhaps at best it looks like some of those 1990 era monstrosities that tried to update classic lines of older bodies but never seemed to get it quite right. In short I do not like it. I much prefer the look of the Nikon Df. And I did not buy that either. In part because the cost of the Df was much higher than that of competing Nikon cameras - I did not like the idea of paying that much just for how the camera looks. There is another thing about both the Df (chrome version) and the pics shown of this new camera. Does anyone else think the chrome looks phoney? Too shiny or something, more like glitzed up plastic than metal. For this reason also I much preferred the look of the black version of the Df. For me it's a pass.
But this camera body does not look to me like an old camera. It looks like something some millennial dreamed up in a design class to try to look like his interpretation of an old camera. It's a wannabe. Perhaps at best it looks like some of those 1990 era monstrosities that tried to update classic lines of older bodies but never seemed to get it quite right. In short I do not like it. I much prefer the look of the Nikon Df. And I did not buy that either. In part because the cost of the Df was much higher than that of competing Nikon cameras - I did not like the idea of paying that much just for how the camera looks. There is another thing about both the Df (chrome version) and the pics shown of this new camera. Does anyone else think the chrome looks phoney? Too shiny or something, more like glitzed up plastic than metal. For this reason also I much preferred the look of the black version of the Df. For me it's a pass.
Jamie Pillers
Skeptic
Personally, I'm not looking forward to anything labeled "retro". I just want a camera that feels/operates like, say a Nikon FM or FE. Its not the "style" cues I'm interested in... its the size, weight, features. Small, simple, and made for photography, not videography.
nickthetasmaniac
Mentor
Sorry what camera are you talking about? I thought this was all rumour at this stage? The link just has photos of the existing Df, FM10 and EM10...
robert blu
quiet photographer
Fully agree, +1
maryland_fotos
Well-known
No you are not the only one. I still have mine, though less in use since I got a Z6.
enasniearth
Well-known
the sp was pretty amazing for 1957
it was a huge step for Nikon and only really sold for three years
its success was overshadowed by the Nikon f
as far as the finder being horrible I would disagree
no other camera at the time had a finder for 28mm
its main target was the photojournalist who traveled light
I have an sp s2 & s3
---the s2 with the separate bright line finders in the shoe is my favorite -but I've been useing it for 47 years - its rf spot is the brightest
the finder has a reflected bright line and with my glasses sometimes I see some flare from it in the finder
---the sp has projected bright lines like the Leica m series - we could spend decades debating whichisbetter and why -
the frames for 50 85 105 + 135 are clear and in many ways I prefer the gold rf spot in contrast & focusing ease to
the m9 based digital leicas - yes the 28/35 finder is a smaller optical separate unit -but i do like it as the camera is more compact &
the transfer from focus to frame quicker
---the s3 suffers from more flare than the s2 = as dag said theres a lot going in the finder -3 reflected bright lines
if you have one with a clean finder the full 35mm frame is nice to use
later Nikon made a prototype sp with a zoom finder and rf spot
probably more useful in digital and view is better
it was a huge step for Nikon and only really sold for three years
its success was overshadowed by the Nikon f
as far as the finder being horrible I would disagree
no other camera at the time had a finder for 28mm
its main target was the photojournalist who traveled light
I have an sp s2 & s3
---the s2 with the separate bright line finders in the shoe is my favorite -but I've been useing it for 47 years - its rf spot is the brightest
the finder has a reflected bright line and with my glasses sometimes I see some flare from it in the finder
---the sp has projected bright lines like the Leica m series - we could spend decades debating whichisbetter and why -
the frames for 50 85 105 + 135 are clear and in many ways I prefer the gold rf spot in contrast & focusing ease to
the m9 based digital leicas - yes the 28/35 finder is a smaller optical separate unit -but i do like it as the camera is more compact &
the transfer from focus to frame quicker
---the s3 suffers from more flare than the s2 = as dag said theres a lot going in the finder -3 reflected bright lines
if you have one with a clean finder the full 35mm frame is nice to use
later Nikon made a prototype sp with a zoom finder and rf spot
probably more useful in digital and view is better
farlymac
PF McFarland
Okay, let me jump in here with a couple of cents worth.
First, all this talk about the upcoming Nikon camera and what it should be is all just conjecture. Nikon themselves have given very little information on what it will be like, other than to say it will have no EVF, auxiliary or otherwise. The only thing that can be construed from this is that it is definitely an introduction-to-the-system type camera, and hints of being an APS-C model.
Secondly, all the talk about retro styling is just wishful thinking on the part of the rumor spreaders. Anything to get their followers reading their posts kind of stuff.
Myself, I've clamored for an S2 type body, but not necessarily retro styled. It could have an electronic rangefinder, and the old S mount converted to AF with a built-in lens drive instead of the finger grinder of old. Manual control dials to top it all off.
If they did that I would chuck all my Leica gear for a purely Nikon digital experience.
PF
First, all this talk about the upcoming Nikon camera and what it should be is all just conjecture. Nikon themselves have given very little information on what it will be like, other than to say it will have no EVF, auxiliary or otherwise. The only thing that can be construed from this is that it is definitely an introduction-to-the-system type camera, and hints of being an APS-C model.
Secondly, all the talk about retro styling is just wishful thinking on the part of the rumor spreaders. Anything to get their followers reading their posts kind of stuff.
Myself, I've clamored for an S2 type body, but not necessarily retro styled. It could have an electronic rangefinder, and the old S mount converted to AF with a built-in lens drive instead of the finger grinder of old. Manual control dials to top it all off.
If they did that I would chuck all my Leica gear for a purely Nikon digital experience.
PF