Nikon Df is here! Pre-order with Special Edition Lens now – $2996.95

106 Comments

1. Voigtlander makes an incredible MF 40MM Ultron Nikon-mount pancake lens that would probably be a spectacular match for this camera…Built like a tank and sharper than any Nikkor glass I’ve used. Can’t wait to try it out…

2. Why shall I preorder the Df? Without seeing ?

3. I’m pretty sure this camera will not be a winner and I personally don’t think you’ll keep it Steve. It will be a good performer in a decent housing, but after the hype is over, I don’t think it’s an true alternative for the various mirrorless system camera’s like the ones from Olympus, Fuji and Sony. The camera looks fat and nothing about it is new. It makes me think of the car brand Lada (except this new Nikon is expensive). Good performance, decent looks, but nothing special.

   • The Skoda in cameraland.

   • Well, if I sell it does not mean it will not be a winner 🙂 I am sure MANy will love it. I am curious to see how I will like it. I am interested in it due to the full frame sensor and the fact that ANY low light shooting will be possible. Also, lenses like the 58 1.2, 50 1.2, older Ai lenses and pre Ai lenses..that is what I am interested in. I could care less about the 24-70’s, 70-200’s, or any of the large modern glass.

4. Looking at the technical specification shows that the 6D Body (with battery and SD Card) is even 10 g lighter than the same equipped Nikon Df. Seems to me that Canon has done a good job with the 6D in terms of balance between weight and performance.

   • The 6D weight was not awful, it was the bulk and the fact that when you add a lens to it, then forget it. THEN it was much to heavy.

5. I thought I wanted one… until I saw the photos. It is not a FM or a F3 with a sensor. It is a fusion of body styles that is just plain ugly. I’ll stick with my Leicas. At least that is one fusion that was done right.

6. Modern day F3 !
   Looks fabulous with AI, AIs & Non AI lens.

   Joe McNally really likes the Df.
   Steve McCurry probably loves Df with a 105mm f2.5

7. I have a set of Nikons including the classic FE and various AI, AI-S, AF-D and AF-S lenses. I think this is a fine solution. The kit lens provides an up-to-date AF lens that is not as blobby and bulky as the present 50/1.8G. I’m sure you can also use a 50/1.8 AF-D or 50/1.8 AI-S on it too if you want an aperture ring. The top plate is not too cluttered IMO, actually it is about the same as an FE except for the MASP dial. (The left dual-wheel is ISO and exposure comp on the FE too.) I think optical VF is the way to go here. My FE doesn’t have a split-image focus screen, although some do. But, I bet they have center-point focus confirm (a red light goes on when the center point is in focus), which is actually not much different than the Leica optical RF system. Plus, of course, you can just eyeball it. Anyway, if your eyesight is bad you should probably just be using AF lenses anyway.

   Pricing is a bit high IMO but that has been common Nikon practice. It is easy to lower later; hard to raise. The D4 sensor will be great in low light.

   Ultimately, it is about feel, form factor, and manual wheels. If the feel and form factor of the D600 doesn’t bother you, there’s no particular reason to go with the Df. You can put AI lenses on the D600 as well.

8. I do like the look of the dials and I do have an AI converted 50mm which would look so good on it. However I bought a D800 a few months ago and am in love with that mega sensor. Why would I go backwards? Seldom if ever use the video on the D800, but that’s another thing to explore at some point

9. I said NO DISPLAY (loose the bulk of the display as well), NO CRAP (who needs autobracketing and does not own a D610), NO AUTOFOCUS and a FOCUS WEDGE…..FRESNELL screen……can’t these Nikon dudes read plain English…….if you give people choices, you have to give them real ones,

   No buy, sorry Nikon, but you I have had it with you…….next camera will be a 4×5…….homebuild if I have the time to design and fabricate it. For all the rest I have 16 Mpixels at hand…..my trusted OM-D EM-5 will have to do…..with some new glass (Sigma 60 for instance).

   Greet, Ed.

10. This camera is not what we wanted. Dials, cool, to big! The Sony has just been put to the top of the heap. A camera could look like a mess, but easy to use and awesome images is what we are expecting. Not re badge of a 2 year old sensor with dials! I am a Nikon fan and had my FM2 what was to me a poor mans Leica. Nikon needs a7r!

11. While we are at it, does this camera mean ‘pure photography’ doesn’t need 36 Mega Pixels?

    • Exactly, Jim. A roll of TRI-X will do the job nicely!

12. Way, WAY overpriced.

13. It may well be that the V1 is “stellar” and that its only shortcoming is that it is “misunderstood.” But if that IS the only problem, whose problem is it? Nikon’s, of course! They failed to make a compelling case that the V1 was worth $899, and so ultimately many of the hundreds of happy owners that you speak of no doubt acquired the V1 at a deep discount. Less than a “stellar” success for Nikon, from a profitability perspective, one might reasonably conclude.

    Perception is reality. It’ll be up to Nikon to convince the skeptical buyer than the DF kit is worth ~3,000 of their hard-earned dollars. I am skeptical myself, given 16 mp and no video capability. Makes it a bit of a tough sell, in my opinion!

    Thanks for doing what you do Steve and for a lively and respectful forum!

14. The Nikon DF looks like a cheap 1960s Russian slr purchased on eBay. I Ike the Nikon cameras which likely inspired it and yet I wouldn’t want to own this one. Retro gone too far.

    I would guess we are likely near the peak of the retro apocalypse and the backlash against this design trend will start soon if it hasn’t already begun.

    The Olympus Pen and Fuji models may be the only retro looking cameras that actually pulled off something modern while being inspired by something vintage.

15. IF you are looking for a smaller, full size sensor, interchangeable lens camera, it seems to be between the Df and the A7(r). Steve, I am really looking forward to your comparison of the two. With the Df, I get to use all my Nikon glass, so that means the price really is around $3K, and I have a huge assortment of glass to choose without an adapter. With the A7(r), I will likely need to get new glass, or use an adapter for the Nikon or other lenses. So the price seems to be higher for the A7(r), when all is said and done. But, which is easier to use, which creates terrific images, which provides greater flexibility? Steve, I look forward to your answers on all those questions. As always, thanks for a terrific site!

16. The D4’s sensor is good, but it’s hardly cutting edge these days. Even the sensor in my 2-year old Sony NEX-7 has greater dynamic range. Frankly, I don’t see the point of this camera. I’d much sooner use my Nikon glass with an adapter on a Sony A7r than this thing.

17. Nikon V/J1-2-3, Coolpix A and now this. Seems like Nikon has been recruiting from Hassleblad’s marketing dept. Pricing for these cameras out of the chute borders on profound stupidity, unless the plan is to simply drop their pants on pricing within a year of release, and not planning on having strong sales numbers until then.

18. I think Nikon has a focus confirmation system so that you can nail the shots using manual lenses.

19. As an old Pentax Spotmatic, Nikon SLR happy owner, I sill find myself rooting for Nikon in the camera field of battle. After switching to a Leica M6 because of the lenses and image quality, I kept all my prime Nikon lenses waiting for the day when I could get their digital full frame camera. When I picked up the D700 for the first time at a store (remember those?) I just set it back down and walked out. I kept the lenses until about a month ago and finally sent them off to KEH. To raise money for one of the new digital cameras that just came out as well. This new retro camera just makes me sad again, and frankly it’s starting to get scary as well now. Sales of cameras overall are down, P&S’s are becoming extinct–losing their niche to cell phones, and the too heavy DSLR’s are, well, already owned by those who want them. So, the DSLR’s are going to have to rely on upgrades of that minority of photographers who need them. And this group may be declining and slipping into the realm of (how huge, bright 4th generation) EVF on smaller, light weight, very high quality midsize cameras like the Olympus E-M1 and others from Sony, etc. How sad, these latter new cameras have access to the same increasingly high quality sensors made by the same companies (Sony, etc.) and EVF made by Epson, and unlike the new Nikon retro camera just released will take all the old manual Nikon and Canon lenses and provide focus peaking for them. These new comers don’t need to restrict their cameras in order to sell their new lenses: they just produce very high quality lenses that people would prefer to use on these new cameras. So, I now own the E-M1 and one Foveon-sensor DP3 that I like so much that I may buy a second one, DP2, for $ 895 with lens because they are so light weight that I can put any two of them around my neck and walk around with them with two different prime focal lengths together.

    So, Nikon is doing an expensive market experiment that looks very dicy to me, when they could have launched into a retro cameras with the high quality EVF with a size and weight that would make it exactly like the much loved, FM3A and its cousins. I’m sure you were tempted to show a photo that compared the new retro Nikon with the old FM3A and the new Olympus E-M1 (all retro, no?), but it might just be too cruel to do it.

20. Many “pure” photographers don’t want video in their cameras. Can’t you simply just not use it. I can understand if the video function affects IQ of the stills or adds size but that’s just not the case. I love being to go backpacking or overseas and able to have a small lightweight setup like my NEX 6 with just a few lens and being able to also use video without having to carry a dedicated video cam which only adds more weight and extra bulk. To each his own I guess.

21. Two things that jump out at me are:
    First, no nub on the power switch for easy turning off and on.
    Second, the camera strap and lug look positioned in a way that might interfere with your trigger finger.

    Also where’s the notches for auto ISO and auto shutter. Ry

22. I was hoping for a smaller much cleaner looking camera. This one looks just like it has to much of everything. Makes that Sony A7 look even better.

23. The ability to use the inventory from over 50 production years of Nikon A, AI, AIS, AF, AF-S and AF-S G lenses, all with their intended AE and AF functions is perhaps a better value than a mirrorless camera with mechanical adapters. But any senior Nikon DSLR does the same.

    The design resembles the Nikon F4 more than the FM, FE or FA line, almost with the F4’s weight, bulk, with buttons, dials scattered all over the body, many accessible only after removing the camera from the eye and twisting it. And still there is a LCD with a cursor controller and a click-wheel to navigate a menu, for those settings for which they could not find space for more buttons and dials. I think it is not the digital FM people have expected after the series of teaser videos.

    The buttons, dials and metal parts appear more rugged than the common plastic. But only few pros will wear body and controls faster than the innards. Deep inside there are the same imaging sensors, image processors, solder joints and capacitors which become obsolete, corrode or age as fast as in any other DSLR.

24. You guys are way ahead of me – I’ll just wait a year and a half and pick one up cheap on eBay when all the early adopters have gotten sick of this camera and need to finance the next greatest thing. That is unless it becomes a retro-cult pure-photography classic and the price goes outta sight 🙂

    In the meanwhile, I’l just be enjoying my ever-amazing EM5. Yay!

25. +3. Really disappointed by Nikon and Canon over the past a few years. My very first camera was a FM2, my very first digital camera was D30, both or which were fantastic cameras at the time. The designers of those cameras put their heart into those products. But nowadays, Nikon and Canon are dominated by marketing people, who think these half-baked products can attract consumers’ heard-earned money; they should take a lesson from Blackberry.

26. The more I look at this the more I’m liking it!
    First impressions are it’s boxy shape – but upon reflection it is very handsome, and made of metal, solid as a rock! I like it and I think it will be a HUGE success!
    All that Nikon Glass eh?

    Superb move by Nikon, and it’s a DSLR too so has all the advantages of a DSLR, and is smaller and lighter than many others – and better constructed by the looks of it.

    If I had a collection of Nikon lenses, I’d snap this up.

27. $2996? Boy, you have got to hand it to the folks at Nikon – they are great kidders. This one’s almost as funny as $899 for a V1 and kit zoom setup! How DO they keep a straight face?

    • Well, the V1 is and was a stellar camera system. Just misunderstood by so many. I know of HUNDREDS who own it and love it to death. When you have a camera that you feel that strongly about, cost is no object. People sometimes think in the entirely wrong way when it comes to price. For example..$7k for a Leica M. That is insane but people buy it. WHY? Because they get the most satisfaction and enjoyment from using it. It inspires them. That is priceless. Same goes for the E-M1 at $1399. I feel that is a deal for what you get in that camera..I really do. It inspires and is a JOY to use. If the Nikon Df gives inspiration to those who own it, and it performs well (how can it not with the D4 sensor), then that is all that matters. I feel it is thick and bulky, but am strangely attracted to it for some reason..and this would be the 1st DSLR in 10 years that I am drawn to.

      So if someone gets joy from it, wants to take it out and create art with it every day or even just wants to document their child, then it is well worth it because why live life half way? Enjoy it while you can and learn from it.

      • Very well said.

        The only real knock against the Nikon 1-Series is the size of the sensor. I think that hurt them somewhat. The rest of the camera is actually quite revolutionary, including things most people DON’T see―like modular internal component design.

        What the 1-Series demonstrates is that Nikon has the technical wherewithal to introduce mirrorless (sensor size notwithstanding), and it may have served as a proof-of-concept for the company as they look at where they want to go with a more serious foray into mirrorless in the future.

        On the other hand, how do you measure the Df’s success? If it reaches or exceeds Nikon’s sales targets, then it can’t really be counted as a failure―Monday morning quarterbacking notwithstanding.

        You’re getting the world’s smallest full-frame DSLR with the sensor from the D4 ― which, despite some criticisms I read, is a tremendous sensor and alone holds huge appeal for a lot of shooters ― in a camera that is less than half the cost of a D4 (with lens). We can debate the wisdom (or not) of NIkon’s choice to omit certain features; change ergonomics; or market it to the “AARP crowd” as Thom Hogan wrote today, but if it makes money then it contributes to the bottom line and allows Nikon to develop new products.

        Of course the Df is retro-niche, not future-mainstream. What will be more interesting is to see where Nikon goes next in terms of product development. I seriously doubt this is the “clearly differentiated in terms of technologies and marketing” product that the last Nikon annual report mentioned or the product that offers “truly innovative functions and performance” that Nikon has discussed. I suspect that’s yet to come.

    • The V1 may have been somewhat overpriced (not massively though in view of its capabilities) when it was released but there’s more innovation in that camera than in the Df. Nikon swam against the tide by going with a smaller sensor and was vindicated when those who could get past the size and megapixel count showed that it produces fantastic images. They left the V1’s body uncluttered and achieved an Apple like simplicity which makes it a joy to use. The V1 was bold, simple, innovative and, to coin a phrase, a return to ‘Pure Photography’. The Df, on the other hand, is um….not.

28. After getting over my intense aversion to the multitude of buttons and dials arrayed around the camera (I counted 23 buttons and dials), I began to rethink this camera (Think Different?). I think this camera body, with its high quality sensor (despite being only 16MP, if those pixels are large and sharp and match well with a lens, then one would certainly have enough quality image pixels to enlarge the image way beyond 11×14) and paired with the new 58mm f1.4 lens would make a terrific desert island camera (if you could only bring one camera along, which would it be…). The entry price is a little high (about $4500 for body and lens; the cost of a used M9) but that’s only about $1500 per year on a three year upgrade cycle basis (assuming one would also upgrade the lens at the same time). This is beginning to be interesting…

29. This looks bad.

    D4 sensor but not D4 AF, instead has the APS-oriented AF module like the D600.
    D4 sensor but not D4 frame rate.
    No interchangeable focus screen or split prism, pretty ordinary viewfinder.
    “Desinged to take photos” — seems more like the locking controls are designed to stop you taking photos.

    Is it aimed at people with a lot of old primes? If so, why can’t you buy it without a 50mm (the lens such people are most likely to have already) in the UK? And sensible people would want video, since it’s basically free, just as a backup for their real video camera.

    This smacks of the same mentality as the pink V1, which attracts female customers don’tcha know. Something for men who wear Barbour.[1]

    Still, at least it’s cheap.

    Oh.

    [1] Retro waxed cotton clothing. It leaks if you don’t re-wax it, stinks if you do, and weighs twice what it needs to. Fine for the fifty yards from the Range Rover to the pub, though.

30. So what do you gain by removing video and extra gimmicks (what are the extra gimmicks other cameras are guilty of?) Because it’s obviously not saving size or cost.

    • About 1400+ shots per battery!

      Though… not that important to me – I’m OK carrying a couple spares.

    • I can get one thing right at a time, thinking of making photos and videos at the same time is a pipe dream for a one man show. If I want video too I will get a second shooter, probably with a Canon DSLR. For something like a making of even a Canon S95, Gopro, Iphone… do a great job.

31. I would like buy one these cameras if:
    1. It had a 20-24MP FF sensor.
    2. If it did movies.
    3. If it were aboub $1k dollars less.
    The only thing I like about this camera is the sutter speed dail and I can live without that. Just think if only, Nikon made a 20-24MP FF for about $2k. They may call it the F or D 600, 610.
    You can only ask yourself, why was this camera even made.

32. Steve, i for one don’t get it, and although i like the retro look, whats so innovative about the thing thats not already been done? Its a rushed out re-packaged D800 with a few features stripped out, its not even all that small unless you compare it to the massive D800. and all at a cost just shy of £3k here in the UK. Nope not convinced, and unless you have a thing for the looks, and a bag full of Nikon lenses, why would anybody choose it over the new Sony offerings? Each to their own i guess.

    • Actually, it’ same repackaged D600 (hopefully d610)…

      • Yer that’s what I meant

33. In my humble opinion Nikon should have put the D4 sensor in a small rangefinder-like body and developed small fast lenses, similar to Leica and Fuji XF lenses. I’m sure the company has the know how. The Nikkor lenses for it’s full frame cameras are among the very best in the world if not the very best. I can’t believe that Nikon isn’t seeing where the trend goes, smaller, mirrorless, cheaper, but with high quality.

    They could actually make one type of body and let the customer choose the sensor, D4, D800, D800E etc. I think that what happened with Kodak missing the digital train and totally loose their huge market share, from almost dominating the market to be bankrupt in a very short time, is something Nikon should take a serious look at.
    I’m not even sure they have to make it cheaper than the competition. If Nikon could put the sensors from the D4 and the D800 and a good AF-system in a weather sealed body the size and look of the Leica M or Fuji X-series (not just a smaller DSLR-lookalike like the Olympus and Sony’s), with the build quality from the D4, I would be first in line to pick up a couple of them even if the cost is similar to the price of the D4 today.

    As it is today, the D4 may well be the last Nikon camera I have bought. It’s fantastic and can do almost everything a professional camera needs to do (some photographers and/or jobs may crave higher res but then the D800 can be used for those situations. I frequently print D3 and D4-files 44 inch wide on the short side, on my EPSON-printer and do not feel I need more megapixels to have great quality) My only problem with the Nikon cameras I shoot, D3 and D4 and Nikkor lenses is the weight and bulk. This summer I shot with Fuji X-pro1 cameras and a full set of XF-lenses kindly on loan from Fujifilm Sweden for over a month. I shot everything I usually do. Weddings, portraits, golf, STCC (Swedish Touring Car Championship) Yes, I shot motor sports with the Fuji X-Pro1! It’s nothing like shooting with the Nikon D3/D4 but it is totally doable once you learn how to and adjust your way of working with the Fuji camera.

    I have since bought a Fuji X100s and have the XE2 and lenses on order. Working full days, 8 to 12 hours with gear weighing as little as the Fuji’s was so freaking good!
    Sure there are jobs I will still shoot with my Nikon’s but they will be few.

    And Nikon’s competition from companies like Fuji grows stronger every month. I don’t think that it will take long before Fuji weather proofs their cameras and lenses and improves the AF even more. The IQ is already there in the small and great looking Fuji X-series. I have no problem shooting weddings in really low light at ISO 6400 with the Fuji’s even though the D4 still is one step ahead in the High ISO department. But for how long?

    It’s exiting days to be a photographer!

34. When I bought my FM3a brand new from BH, total cost before tax: $354.00 USD. To get the Frankenstein not so equivalent wanna be $2799.99 USD. Shake my head in relief that I won’t be getting one of the wanna-bes, priceless.

    • Yes, what a price jump huh? $354…the good old days 🙂

    • This camera makes me want an FM3A all over again!

      • If I remember it right the FM3A was the hipster camera of its time. Don’t get me wrong, I still own a FE2 (I love it) and in 2003-2004 I was thinking to get a FM3A as a back up. I changed my mind and went digital instead.

        • It may have been a hipster camera. I don’t know,but IMHO a it is the most capable film camera available…brings me back to my beginning days as a photographer…

35. Hi Steve, do you think this is something for the pro wedding photographer? high iso and low weight. or more aimed at the amateur?

    • I don’t know a single good wedding photographer who would use a camera that does not offer memory card redundancy. How would you like to explain to the bride and groom that their memories are lost because your memory card failed?

36. A bit of “retro” perspective… I have my F2a, F3, and FM in front of me as I write. 35 years ago, I bought an FM as a back-up to my F2a. The FM was lighter, smaller, and had the flash-synch advantages of a vertically traveling metal blade shutter. The F2a, just like the F3 after it, had the advantage of being modular. One could switch backs (to bulk holders) and, more important, one could not only change focusing screens but also remove the pentaprism and replace it with waist level, magnifying, or oversized-eye-piece finders. Not least, when first introduced, the FM was almost 50% less expensive than the F2. The Df offers neither the size, weight, and cost savings of the FM nor the modularity of the F2 and F3. A combination of D4 sensor and D600 focussing might have its merits but except for its oversized “facade” the Df seems to have no relations to the F-series of yore.

37. I like the direction they’re going, but like everyone else, I can’t get past the complete inability to manual focus well. What’s the point of looking like an F2 if you can’t manually focus any more accurately than maybe 2.8?

38. +1

39. While the $2996.95 price isn’t unexpected, I think many Nikononians were holding out hope that Nikon would price it more aggressively; a sign that Nikon was ready to step-up their game and vigorously and _boldly_ pursue/defend their market dominance.

    The truth is, even if the Df kit was priced at $4000, it would still be the cheaper option for me, using my existing Nikon glass, rather than purchasing an A7r, the 2 Zeiss primes and zoom.

    But it seems that Sony is the one listing more to me as a customer. It seems that Sony is the one aggressively perusing the market (yes, even in this time of downturn) with innovation and aggressive pricing. It seems like Sony is working harder to get my money. It seems like Sony is more deserving…

    • I think the price is ok, you get the D4 sensor in a smaller body with easy controls and with the black retro design you will not get much attention on the street (big+). I wouldn’t need to buy one lens for it, because all my old AF lenses would be just perfect for this kind of body. I can not understand that there will be no grip (to adjust the camera to your current needs) available. This is the one reason why I will get the A7 with a vertical grip and even invest in a couple of Sony lenses.

    • “It seems like Sony is working harder to get my money. It seems like Sony is more deserving…”

      I think you just hit the nail on the head there. And rather than working to produce something that’s as good as it can be – under the assumption that strong, correctly priced product will sell – Nikon seems to just be agonising about whether a new product will cannibalise its existing products. I remember seeing a report about the (then) new Porsche Cayman. The reviewer liked the car but said that it clearly could have been so much better if it hadn’t so obviously been designed by a marketing team with the sole purpose of filling a niche between the Boxster and the 911.

      Nikon seems to be more obsessed with tinkering with it’s product portfolio than producing cameras that real photographers actually want to buy and I believe that is going to hurt them long term.

      • +1

      • +2

40. John McEnroe said it all years ago: “You can NOT be SERIOUS!”

    Anyone been to a Bob Dylan concert in recent years? Anyone see what Marianne Faithfull looks like today?

    This camera is the Cher of retro DSLRs today,attempting a comeback against Alicia Keys and Taylor Swift.

    Fail. I’m going Sony A7. In the unlikely event I want to schlepp my great Nikkor AiS glass, I’ll use my E-mount adapter. Why would anyone pay $3000 to do the same?

41. I will wait till you get this one, Steve, will read your reports on it, and then buy my A7 since it will be here on the market then. I compare what is comparable, on high ISO sensitivity it will better, for sure. But that’s it, after that you remain with the look, and a high price you paid for that look, and that was it, in exception of expenses, nothing new in the West. It has D4, 2 year old sensor, a compressed D600 body that looks like an ancient F3 body. It looks great, and nobody can say that this is not true. Just, not worth the money you pay for it. At 1600$ for the body, i would have bought both, since I really like that look.

42. I hope the viewfinder will be great with manual lenses, but I don’t think it will. Fixed focusing screen and no micro prism or split ring.

    • Yes, that is my concern as well. I remember trying to MF with a D700 and D800, and was hit or miss most of the time. I really do not know what Nikon concentrated on the whole “Pure” thing, made it retro..and then did not make it optimized for MF.

43. lost opportunity here, there’s no focusing aid for old lenses, it should have come with changeable focusing screens. don’t understand who’s Nikon targeting with this cam. for ‘G’ lens owners I don’t see any benefit over traditional DSLR, for old manual focus lens owners it brings absolutely nothing apart from bunch of dials on top (why does it have PASM, why is exp compensation on the left) – confused execution at best, panic? maybe, don’t believe they’ve been working on this for 4 years, you can’t release this after 4 years of development. UK price is crazy, good luck Nikon!

    • Yes, I agree..was my fear about this camera all along. When I mentioned this a week or two ago I was slammed by a few saying I had no clue and that Nikon would not screw it up. Funny how it turned out to be exactly as I thought it probably would. Nikon wants to sell new lenses..not have everyone buy old cheap used lenses. I still like the idea, the style and what the IQ capabilities but I think once I try it I will be saying..”damn, this is one thick camera..where is my A7r” 😉

44. I use a Canon 5D (Classic Mark I) with a Zeiss 35mm f/2.4 Flektogon in front and I always shoot RAW. This combination has been the closest I’ve had compared to shooting an old 70s or 80s film camera.

    Surely, I haven’t bothered to put a split viewfinder screen in. Those don’t work as well as they’re advertised. I use a DMF-chipped m42-EF adapter which gives me MF confirmation. The camera has only 9 AF points and I couldn’t care less since I use the center one and recompose. Just as I’ve been doing when I was shooting with my Canon T90.

    Also, just like the Canon T90, I do have a control dial under my index finger. I can set the shutter speed with that or I can set it to the maximum aperture on my lens and stop down my lens; the camera will still meter correctly. I can dial in the preferred exposure compensation with my thumb when needed.

    I never have to care about WB, Jpeg options, Picture Style, Miniaturization effect etc since I’m shooting in RAW. I don’t have video mode. My rear screen is so bad, there’s no point in chimping.

    This, in my opinion, is how a DSLR can be a pure photographer’s camera.

    The Nikon on the other hand, looks like it’s the real deal. However, I refuse to press a button to release the external dials so that I can set my preferred shutter speed. I refuse to let my camera meter with my dumb lens (pre-ai) and prompt me to set the aperture on the lens again. A Leica can do stopped down metering. Sony A7 can do proper metering with those dumb Nikkors (While giving you useful MF aid and showing you the actual DOF at almost half the price). My almost 30 years old T90 can meter with those Nikkors.

    This looks like an industrial design student’s 2nd term project, who has always liked how old cameras look but has never taken a single picture.

45. Underwhelming, to say the least. Too big and heavy to be a digital FE2. It looks like a mock FE2 but with a cheap plastic casing on it to bulk it out. Poorly thought out controls, if simplicity was the aim. Needs lenses with aperture control if it is really going to function with the elegance of the older Nikon cameras. 16MP means it is only modestly high resolution – almost certainly not enough for landscape buffs, and worst of all – a typically moderate digital viewfinder. The great thing about older cameras Fm2/FE2/F3, Pentax LX, Olympus OM 4ti, Leica R9/Leicaflex etc was that their viewfinders were big and bright for good manual focus. This camera has the usual dim and small AF focus viewfinder.

    This fails in almost every respect if it is trying to hark back to earlier minimalist, simple, elegant, petite design, implied in the adverts.

    Thimbs firmly down!

46. Its nothing like an R-D1s!

    My baby: http://www.flickr.com/photos/s13n1/8860315980/

    • Now THAT is a retro digital done right!

47. Seeing that old school exposure compensation dial on the left reminded me of why I switched from Nikon to Canon back in the 90’s. The rear control wheel on the EOS was a huge leap forward in useful design, allowing you to shoot in an automatic mode while still being able to quickly adjust the exposure, all without taking your eye off the viewfinder. Of course Nikon had to acknowledge that it was a better way to do things, so they copied it, which was the right thing to do. To go back to that now is one of the reasons I think this camera is a big mistake for Nikon. They’re putting style before substance, and that’s a shame for a company with such a glorious past. Same goes for the ISO dial. It’s a ridiculous affectation. I think Nikon missed a great opportunity to pay homage to their past here. To ‘unimprove’ features of a camera for superficial style reasons is not what their past was all about.

    • Absolutely true. While I understand the nostalgia, it still makes for a more challenging shooting experience in certain situations…

48. Well if there was any doubt about whether I was going to buy one of these, the pricing just made my mind up for me (and I say that as a 25 year Nikon shooter who would’ve been all over a genuine ‘digital’ FM2). Here in the UK, the body +50mm kit is the only option so far, at the equivalent of US$4,400 (that’s not a typo…!) If we assume that the lens is worth maybe $400, the line up of potential competitors looks like this (all prices are UK pounds converted into US$ and body only)

    Df $4,000
    D800 $2,900
    D610 $2,400
    A7 $2,100
    EM-1 $2,100

    I don’t know which planet Nikon inhabits these days but do they really think that at that price this camera is going to revitalise their flagging sales? Sure there will be some people out there who will bite but in the bigger picture, nowhere near enough to make a meaningful difference to the company’s bottom line. Unlike Canon, Nikon’s overall business is highly reliant on cameras (75% of sales) and they just don’t seem to have grasped that the market is changing around them. Someone needs to send them some business case studies (how about Kodak, GM and Blackberry for starters) ‘cos the Nikon bus is heading for the cliff edge and the driver is asleep at the wheel.

    • Sales for all the major camera manufacturers are lagging.

      How is the market changing around Nikon? Are you talking about mirrorless? Mirrorless is a non-starter in Europe and North America. Are you talking about the rise of the smartphone? That’s siphoning sales for ALL camera manufacturers at the low end.

      How will Kodak, GM and Blackberry’s histories (all of which are radically different, btw, and GM is actually doing well right now) in any way help Nikon?

      Let’s hear your solution… Seriously…

      • My answer, is just do the job properly, and give people what they asked for and not just what, with minimal R&D, you want to give them.

        For ages now so many people have asked for a digital Fm2/FE2.

        This needs to be
        a) as small as an Fm2
        b) as light as an Fm2
        c) with manual controls like the Fm2 (so a new plastick fantastic with an aperture ring).
        d) A decent bright viewfinder to be able to focus manual lenses.
        e) rugged, robust and reliable like the Fm2, with excellent battery life.

        This may not yet be possible, maybe not, but I suspect it is, if there is a will and if it is worth the investment. Given the number of amateur photographers who have been asking for such a simple camera, it could be a winner. Nikon must decide. But trying to palm off such compromised design as something that harks back to earlier robust simplicity does not bode well for ever achieving such a goal.

      • Look, I like Nikon, I have many Nikon film and DSLR bodies plus a V1. I want Nikon to prosper. But they just seem to have a natural talent for falling on their face right now.

        – Unacknowledged technical issues e.g. focusing problems and oil spots.

        – Marketing blunders e.g. launch the innovative and actually rather brilliant N1 line at totally the wrong price and with the wrong marketing message (it’s for soccer moms and people who like pink cameras).

        – Neglecting key customer segments: sorry DX guys, we’ve been too busy making moody videos of a Guy Ritchie lookalike fondling his shutter speed dial in a forest to get around to making any more dedicated lenses for your bodies

        And now a comically late, misguided, clumsy and over-priced entry into the retro market months or years after everybody else.

        Oh, and about those prices. Equivalent of $4,000 – $4,400 for a re-packaged D4 sensor in a body that looks like the designers loaded a shotgun with dials and buttons and fired it in the general direction of the camera? Right…

        As for the comparisons with other companies, my point was that businesses get into trouble when they fail to see the changing dynamics of their market, when they misunderstand their customers, mis-price products (seriously – a $1,100 equivalent premium for a Df over a D800…?) and fail to acknowledge product glitches.

        Still, they’ll sell at least 1 Df to Ron ‘Anchorman’ Burgundy: “I’m very important. Uh, I have many leather-bound books, and my apartment smells of rich mahogany.”

        • Good points Col, I am equally astounded at the UK price for the DF.

          Last night I went to bed thinking that the DF was the camera for me. I have been preparing to jump from Canon to Nikon in the near future, buying the 800e for studio work and have been very excited about the DF for travel & personal.

          But I don’t understand how can the kit price can be £2749.00 ($4,413.12) in the UK vs $2997 in the US? Seriously?

          • Yes – and the price differential isn’t just about tax. The D610 is about 20% more expensive in the UK than the US but the Df is 47% more. Nikon has clearly decided that UK buyers are happy to be fleeced for a faux retro cameras. Perhaps, since many of us live in old houses with ‘many leather-bound books’ we’ll be prepared to pay that premium so we can casually leave our cameras around to impress our friends. But the lack of tragic hipster culture here means that strategy is probably doomed to fail.

        • And while the ‘flagship’ D4 sensor is very good indeed, it certainly doesn’t justify the cost IMHO, especially considering that is likely ‘not as great’ as the $1700 Sony A7 sensor.

    • I couldn’t believe the UK RRP £2749!! The spectre of the Df release had me worrying about an acute case of buyers remorse on the A7, grip & lenses pre-order but after the Df announcement je ne regrette rien!
      As a former Nikon DSLR shooter it did initially appeal but the actual product doesn’t appeal – the size, ergonomics, lack of EVF (too used to one now) and most of all that PRICE rule it out for me.

      • totally agree Piarco, i do not understand Nikons marketing strategy on this at all.

49. I hope the zeiss 50 for A7 will go down after the release 😀 *cross my fingers*

50. I ordered one and a Hummer H1 as well. Somehow they look like a good fit.

51. A retro version of cameras that were actually popular in the marketplace at the time they were made! Olympus talks a good game about the OM and the PENs, but they were niche products then and they’re niche products now.

    • They might be niche products, but my PEN runs circles around my Nikon DSLR in terms of AF speed, AF accuracy, IQ and most importantly: joy of use.

      One thing Olympus has taught me is that mirrorless technology will outperform DSLR designs by an astronomic margin in the next years. Blazing fast and incredibly accurate AF (no more AF fine tuning!). Gigantic viewfinders. Clean designs. Compact, fully modular cameras.

52. What a pity that Nikon/Canon don’t seem to understand the use of an EVF in a DSLR. Or even a focusing screen ala “retro”, like a split screen. This camera comes very close to being something, but then just falls short of the mark with the viewfinder. Looks like my D700 is going to stay put and not get sold just yet.

53. Steve,

    So what would you recommend, Sony A7/A7r or Nikon Df if you have to chose one?

    • I have not even touched the Df yet but it appears to be quite a but bulkier and weightier than the A7. I am drawn to the A7 for the ability to use Leica M glass such as a 35mm, 50mm, and all kinds of old vintage glass. The Nikon..while it can use vintage Nikon F mount..will be tricky to focus. I wish Nikon had made it optimized for MF. I am torn. I like a good looking, tough as nails camera that can perform but I also like my small HQ cameras, and the Sony is as small and HQ as they come, and the price is 100% right. The Nikon…I will have to wait and see how it is in use. I may love it, I may hate it…hopefully I will get it at the end of the month to let everyone know the real deal, and if it is not up to par for the cash..I will let you know. I will also do a side by side with the A7r for giggles.

      • Steve, not sure if it is a ‘tough as nails’ camera. The skeleton shots of it show only the top and bottom plates are a metal alloy, while the rest is plastic. The lens mount is metal but it is attached to a plastic chassis.
        Nikon’s pro SLRs – digital and film – have the lens mount attached to a metal chassis.

        This thing seems all show. Lots of knobs to make it ‘pure photography’, but no proper incorporation of manual focus, a weird feature set – no video to make it pure, but here are some gimmicky film effect presets like fish bowl, toy camera etc.

        The Df will be handy with AF lenses, but so is the D300, D600, D610, D800, D4 etc etc. And those give you more for the money. And it seems they are all equally bad manually focussing.

        • If not, it will be disappointing. I remember the old classic Nikons and they WERE tough as nails. If this is all show..not good.

      • Steve, I’m normally on the same page with you when it comes to pricing and value, but I think you missed the mark on this camera. While I think the pricing is justifiable, I think Nikon missed the mark big time. While some will say just the D4 sensor is worth it, it is two years old and is competed with very well by the D610/A7 sensor. Furthermore, it is crippled in so many ways that I have a hard time understanding it’s appeal (save for those with legacy nikon glass). 1) no video – at all? Without technical limitations? Out of principal to enhance the ‘pure photgraphy’? Utter nonsense. 2) Using the 39 point AF from the d610 in a $2750 camera when the d7100 use the enhanced 51 point system at half the price? 3) A single SD card slot? This makes it an instant no go for any critical work due to potential card failure. I just don’t get it. The D610 measures up with more features for $750 less. The D800 is the same price, but easily outclasses the DF in every way (and can readily be found for $2500). But the kicker for me is that it is rivaled in every way by the A7 in a smaller package for $1000 less. I wanted to love this camera, but it just shows me how out of touch Nikon is with the world. While I’m disappointed with the camera, I do look forward to your take on it, and I’ll be interested to see what you can do with it. Keep up the good work!

54. Looks like a great camera, although not the DM3a we have been asking for since before the financial crisis. And in Europe it is prohibitively expensive at €3,350. Am looking forward to reading your review and seeing other people use it. I love the dials – it is almost like an R-D1s 😉

55. Looks cool, and for me the BIG take away from this camera is that Fuji (and probably sony) have put Nikon (hello cannon?) on notice and at least Nikon is responding. They probably wanted to respond as QUICKLY as they could, hence the non new internals….

    For me, a7r is still better……BUT it DOES say Sony on it…so you know that means at best, it’s kinda crappy (not true at all)

56. important point when you mention the manual lenses. there is no chance to change the focusing screen! so good luck with the manual lenses, I would rather go the focus peaking way

    • This issue’s being overlooked by all the hype, but it’s a deciding non-starter issue for those of us without perfect vision…which is likely the majority of potential buyers in the target market. What were they thinking?

57. Autofocus works only until -1 ev in low light, that´s very bad and slowest shutter speed is 4 sec. – that´s even worse. So bulb mode will be your friend. You can´t even change the focus screen so proper manual focusing will be difficult. I am sorry, but I am so disappointed…

58. I like the camera , what a no video , hope to use it for portraits , what a 85mm on it . Would it work with other lens

    • I feel this and an 85 will be a great combo..but I have been eyeballing the 28 f/2, 35 1.4 and 50 AIS lenses. Have to see how it is to MF.

59. Somehow, i am not intrigued at all… and i own a X100. After what sony had to offer, this seems more “meh”, in other words, i don’t think they lived up to the hype.

60. I think the black one looks fine. a tad bit awkward, but fine. The silver color, however, brings out the Dof preview and other button. the silver one would look so much better if those buttons were put elsewhere. Also, does anyone know what the front dial even does?

61. Sweet call recommending the old school (but still current model!) 50mm 1.2 AIS lens. I have one, and they run about $400 used in good nick.
    I’m torn about the Df. I just want to use it with my AIS lenses as a manual focus camera, but the spec says it uses a digital rangefinder aid to help focus. Just like the other Nikon DSLRs. So it does not sound like a method I would like. I think I’ll hold off until you review it, so we can see about the functionality of the manual focus.

    p.s the Nikkor Micro 55 2.8 (which will work great with this camera due to the high ISO levels it can use) is freakin’ fantastic, better optically than the 1.2 and dirt cheap used. About $120-$150.

62. I thought retro would mean simplicity; why so many dials?

    • I agree! There is a large dial on top for shutter… and a regular dial on back to ALSO control shutter. I would have preferred just the large one on top and the small dial on front to control aperture. If there is a thumb command shutter dial on the back, it kind of takes away the charm of the manual shutter dial on top which I would be less likely to use, having a thumb dial. Its like they felt they HAD to include one to make people happy. 🙁

63. Interested about manual focusing with this camera. I allways wanted ZEISS 85 1.4 on my DSLR but afraid of manual focusing.

64. Amazing camera, I most definitely want one. Just a shame its more modern than retro. The pure photography campaign led you to believe it would be an electronic fm2, really stripped back, but nevermind. Nice to see Nikon doing something for this demographic. Just have to sell a bunch of stuff to afford this now. Ho hum 🙂

65. I quite like the look of the black one. It’s kind of ugly, and I love that about it.

    • It is that awesome Nikon kind of ugly, in that way that all Nikons are kind of ugly but the exact sort of ugly you want on your back in a barroom brawl, or at least when you are taking pictures of one. I keep thinking “Tower of Hanoi” when I look at the top controls on the camera. I’m certain I would enjoy shooting with this camera very much. I just don’t want one. This makes me think of the Nikon F. I can’t wait to see their real effort at an fm/fe2 profile..

Comments are closed.