Some said the A7 and A7r are ugly but Nikon made an even more crazy new camera design. UPDATE: The Nikon DF has just been announced (Amazon, Adorama, BHphoto).
After Fuji and Olympus also Nikon is trying to give some touch of “old” design to their digital cameras. Don’t know if it would be a wise move for Sony too. Let’s say, something like a [shoplink 22551 ebay]Minolta X-700 (here on eBay)[/shoplink] could be nice or not?
[shoplink 22551 ebay]
[/shoplink]
293 Responses
DFugly
DF = Deep Fugly
Now I see the A7 with other eyes…
+1 so true.
NICE!!!
Nice? It’s BEAUTIFUL.
I have no idea why the f*** anyone would find it ugly. I guess people who find DF ugly are the same who think that A7 horror is beautiful?
They’re both horrific, each in a slightly different way.
The weirdest thing is people caring so much about camera looks that they need capitals and swearing to convince others of their aging (see what I did there) taste in camera (…) looks.
That’s one of these cases where there’s no good solution, right? If I’m older than you – it’s “aging taste” – if I’m younger than you – it’s “hipster taste”.
I managed to hit the right buttons, as expected.
Andrea: The ISO-dialon the top plate suggests its top ISO being 51200, as it ranges from 100-12800 and has a Low-setting (50) and 2 High settings (25600 and 51200)
luckily they doesn’t offer a7 in silver
Well, I think it’s got a few more controls on it than it needs/ought, but I don’t think it’s any uglier than say, the Nikon F3 was. As far as the Sony A7/A7r, I think it’s about as attractive as a Topcon from the 70’s…
They are going to milk the retired nikonians with decent pensions!
lol +1
Well said! My thoughts exactly!
Yes!
Quite ugly. But the control layout looks great and the ISO dial is awesome. Always wanted one since I switched from the Powershot G.
I find it fantastic, it has all the dials needed, it looks sturdy, rigid, well built, magestic camera.
If it competes against a7/R pricewise, it would be a great camera to switch to Nikon since a7R with microlenses couldnt manage to get wideangle lenses to work properly without colorshifting.
I seriously doubt it will be anywhere near the a7 in price. Probably more expensive than the a7r.
Yep, majestic indeed. It’s like taking pictures with the Titanic.
I would like to see you put those ultra-wide RF lenses on the Df and see if they work any better! Oh, that’s right, you can’t because it’s not mirror less with short flange to sensor distance. I’ve got a super nice Olympus OM 21mm f3.5 that I think will work great on the a7R – I know it’s great on my NEX 7. Won’t be using any of the lenses that don’t work
It’s also not a mirrorless camera
The DF has the same 16MP sensor as the D4 with 204800 iso max but when I compared the D4 with the entry level Sony A3000 @ 25600 iso there was not a huge difference.
Sony A3000 vs Nikon D4 @ 25600 iso :
http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5530/10043166153_69b61be5c6_o.jpg
i see massive difference
D4 on the right? Way more contrast…
D4 on the right also has more detail.
Specs of Df are;
16.2 megapixel FF sensor (D4 sensor)
Pentaprism viewfinder
Expeed 3 processor
3.2-inch LCD screen
Native ISO of 100-12,800
5.5fps continuous shooting for up to 100 shots
An optional top winder is available for $320.95.
I applaud Nikon for removing video capture… But question it as a business practice.
Well, at least you can get an awesome selection of native lenses for it.
I wonder why the Hasselblad-finance guys do not make a deal with Nikon. This camera has so many buttons where they could put on their H-logo.
This will kill anyone interested in switching from Nikon to Sony. Mission accomplished. Sony relegated to the amateur market. Sony fail. Nikon wins.
This camera doesn’t respond to Sony; it responds to Fuji and Olympus. Nikon is still a leader, but knows it is approaching turbulent rapids ahead.
+1 Two cameras get announced at the same time and suddenly it’s a ferocious rivalry.
” Nikon is still a leader, ”
Yes, a leader of the dinosaur class of cameras. Just like Kwannon, they still are clueless what path to go in the future. Their mirrorless strategy has been a failure.
“This camera doesn’t respond to Sony” – WHAT?! You blind? People switch from Sony to Nikon JUST FOR THIS ONE BODY. Yet alone decide to stay in instead of going for A7. That camera rings the bells of so many people interested in switching to Sony that you have no idea. How many will actually switch depends much on a price, but as long as it’s sub 3000$ for body only – it will be a huge victory for Nikon notably dumping the sales of A7 (which appeal comes in a huge part from using retro lenses – and this body can use them as well, only NATIVELY and in STYLE that fits the lenses).
“You blind?” That’s your argument? Where are those people you are talking about?
Just browse around. Nikonrumors, petapixel, etc.
Oh, please. Browse around?
Why so much anger LensIsAll? What makes you so unhappy?
You act like you wanted A7r so bad but they ain’t give it to you. Relax. You don’t know much about the DF yet to speak so strongly.
Blind fanboyism is just pissing me off a bit. I’m cool with fanboyism when it got some merit in it, but seems like some people go way over the board.
@lensisall
“This camera doesn’t respond to Sony; it responds to Fuji and Olympus.”
> You call that “blind fanboyism? Are you on a trolling spree today?
Yes, I agree, some people go way over the board.
So they switch just for the looks? The Sony A7/A7r are mirror-less cameras that will accept virtually all types/brands of lenses with proper adapters that DON”T NEED CORRECTION GLASS TO FOCUS TO INFINITY. Try that with the F-mount. This is what makes the E-mount (and other ILCs) so attractive in the first place..
Sorry not for me. The ergonomics are poor with too many buttons bunched together to be comfortable. With rather low performance related specs, single card slot, and high price, I’m simply not impressed. It feels like a total gimmic designed to make some rather snobbish shooters feel good.
I think not. I can see having both in my stable working side by side. A7 (I’ve pre-ordered) for my rangefinder glass, and this for my old nikkor, Zeiss ZF, and converted Leica R glass – assuming there is a special feature for manual glass beyond the “green dot”. I don’t shoot weddings, so I can get away with manual focusing all the time.
Ugly. More retro crap.
I think it looks OK, but it does remind me of the Dynax 5… which was rather the other end of the price range…
I think it’s wonderful! I embrace the retro design. It’s a little too rounded, but I think they really nailed the film camera look.
Minolta X-700 looks great 🙂
It does 🙂
Said by a person who thinks DF is ugly. How ironic.
What’s ironic? That I like one camera better than another?
i prefer my Minolta XD7, X-700 is way to plastic
Looks like a bigger brother of Olympus EM1.
I like the dials layout, it looks as everything is at its place (maybe too crowded, at first sight), but… It’s just another DSLR. With an OVF. A mirror. Heavy. With heavy lenses. No, I’m not interested in a dinosaur, and yes, I prefer the a7s’ shape&size.
16mp fullframe? So the design is retro ’80 and the sensor is retro 2000.
Well there’s no arguing when it comes to taste, but there’s few things I want to point out;
These old rangefinder cameras that everybody’s trying so hard to mimic where designed the way they were designed not because the designers at that time thought that they were asthetically the most pleasing master pieces but because of the technical limitations they had.
There’s also nothing wrong with a solid feeling metal block with leather handgrip when it comes to camera design but grey plastic and rubber is not the same thing. Design should always be true to itself and that’s not the case with most cameras out there.
The new Nikon hardly resembles their old rangefinders. It’s a classic Nikon SLR design, clearly Sony people are uninformed as to what a SLR is like. And has the good pentaprism OVF that goes with that. Good that Nikon is still giving their customers what they want.
+ 1
The direct access to all the essential functions is great. But why does it need to be ‘retro’? Form follows function. Artificial styling is wrong imho.
I’d say: Advantage Sony A7.
haha, that’s exactly why A7 pretends to be an SLR with fake pentaprism. Form follows function. What a fanboy BS.
fake EVF ?? I am a Canon shooter 🙂
Saying that it’s an “Advantage Sony A7” when clearly it’s not.
LensIsAll is fighting in wardust, either with him or against him
100% agree !
My post was in response to Marco…
Always good with more new equipment to choose from.
I don’t care so much about the look. It’s the end result (images, video)
that’s matter. But I care about size, weight and price. And of course some
about feature and lens options.
So… can’t beat my RX100! 🙂
Its not ugly, its just Retro.
If the price is ok, why not buy it. Reminds me on the good old times with my Praktika 4.
The 1499 € for the A7 are just an awesome price. Its an retro looking Full-Frame Camera, for 1500 €, just cool!
But Olympus and so on add an “Retro-Tax” or something like that, thats just stupid.
If Nikon sells the FD for a good price, its a cool retro camera. Nothing wrong with it. Its not ugly at all.
But i would still rather buy an “normal” DSLR just because they have much better ergonomics.
Does resemble some of the film SLRs, and looks good, I like it.
“16MP, 5 fps, Max ISO of 204.800(!) and a 3.2 inch screen”
It seems that these numbers are all that matters in a camera; they define it.
I am different: I might decide to buy it, or not, but none of those figures is going to play a role in my decision.
Now it’s your time to ask: “Why? Can I also learn why those numbers don’t matter?”.
Price is going to drive this camera. Some people think it’s going to be in the 3k-4k range, others think sub 2k. If it’s sub 2k, most of the nikon folks who were considering the A7 will probably go with the DF. (unless they really want more mpxl) But if it’s a premium item, this probably isn’t going to impact the A7/r sales too much.
This is what I’ve said from the start about this rumored camera. The price is everything, I think a lot of people would love a modern stills only camera with no over abundance of auto modes. I myself would love to be able to have something like that. I’ve actually begun looking into the a850/900 for this very reason, and also the canon 5d but seems like that camera is probably passed its useful life generally speaking.
The looks of the camera doesn’t matter. The most important to me is the functionality and the quality, like low noise, fps, fast focus…..
Said like a true gearhead.
It’s beautiful with your eyes closed. Kinda makes a Miranda camera look good.
http://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=images&cd=&docid=zm4vuInIShojBM&tbnid=gRms-cw9ZN-EAM:&ved=0CAUQjRw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ebay.com%2Fctg%2FMiranda-Sensorex-EE-35mm-Film-Camera-%2F96940294&ei=wex3UsTnGqaA2wWyqoCoBA&bvm=bv.55819444,d.b2I&psig=AFQjCNHAv9GwvEbR68aXBFEnryNvOwG2Qg&ust=1383677483420015
Worst looking camera ever. http://farm1.static.flickr.com/34/102296151_1bc6e141be.jpg
lol, that camera is so ugly that it is beautiful.
I beg to differ: http://www.flickr.com/photos/captkodak/271857649/
No way. This wins competition easily: http://3zgehi1uaxi23dphbrgqa50r6z.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Chris-Gampat-The-Phoblographer-Sony-A7-A7r-RX10-Zeiss-Lenses-3-of-31.jpg
Oh, and you know why? Because Pentacon is pure function – every element of this camera is designed this way for some specific feature. The linked camera meanwhile is designed to look like something it’s not with fake features.
Well, you could say the same thing about Isabella Rossellini.
There are lots of ways to implement function, with drastically different results.
That bulky α7 and α7R Viewfinder is retro enough already.
If we are discussing purely design, it is a “classic design” but perhaps not as elegant as the Leica M, the Fuji’s, the NEX, the DX1/DX1r or the A7/A7r but in par with Nikon’s film cameras designs. I like the functionality of the dials. Now if it is made of quality materials like films cameras used to be and it is weather sealed then I think such classic designs will have a market. Personally I dont like plastic or partially plastic made bodies, battery doors, etc… In principle material costs should be weighted in with the product price segment and life cycle which I think is much shorter for digital cameras vs film cameras. A film camera would last close to a lifetime whereas digital cameras improve constantly at the very least due to sensors technology development. Wrt the specs I’d not remove the video capability as it is practical and many got used to having it.
It’s not only ugly, it’s ridiculously so. This is faut retro at its very worst. It’s even an insult to the intelligence of its target audience !! I do think the A7 is pretty bad itself, but compared to this one it actually manages to look sleek and sexy. This one sits right there with the E-M1 and the K30, lol !
I think this is 100% the camera that the nikon D700 gang will buy. but I don’t think it is as good as it could have been. the iso dial and the shutterspeed dial I like but that’s about it.
It’s OK, but only OK.
Why put a plastic thumb wheel on the back, when there is all that metal around everywhere else?
Flip-screen is easy to implement, and does not run afoul of “retro styling”, since there was no screen of this type on any camera in the 1980’s. Essential for me.
Don’t really like the look of the knurls on the knobs, I would have to see how they feel and grip in actual practice.
Also I would want a beefier grip, I have big hands.
Not a bad job, though, overall, IMHO.
Nikon has a lot of lenses to offer vs the A7/A7r I feel this may be a tie-breaker for some… All in all it is excellent to have new cameras to suit all tastes !
The black model is attractive, the silver/black looks like a throwback to cheap/ugly 90’s SLR platicky-ness. I like that the shutter button has a threaded hole for the standard shutter manual shutter release cable. Strange that they don’t offer at least some sort of rudimentary video function, that’s a strange sort of statement. The sensor is supposedly the same as the one in the D4 which at DxOMark is rated overall lesser to the A7r (89 vs. 95) in performance, and in the subcategories only beats the A7r in low ISO (2965 vs. 2746) which could be attributed to the larger photo-sites.
Steve Huff posted a pic of a size comparison between the DF, A7 and Leica M 240. Man does the DF look cluttered: http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/3-way.jpg
Only it’s not plastic. It’s metal. Just photographs perhaps are misleading. But this camera got nothing in it from plastic ’90s.
Sorry to disappoint you.
Judging by that picture, the whole front will be plastic:
http://nikon-df.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2013/11/Nikon-Df-camera-magnesium-alloy-body.jpg
True. Still though my statement is truth. It’s nothing like plastic cameras in 90s. Parts that look like metal ARE made of metal.
Finally a camera that looks like a camera. I’m sure it looks “industrial” to most people but I think that is the look Nikon intended for this camera to have. Frankly I like it because it reminds me of the classic Nikon F and FM models I used to shoot with many years ago. I’m also happy to hear that this model does not have any video capabilities and the focus was purely on shooting photographs.
The Df has as much visual appeal to me as a Citroen 2CV…this from a one-time Nikon F3 and current D800 owner. I see an A7 in my future.
You should perhaps see the A7 in real life. Saw it lately at Sony Store in Berlin, actually both, the A7r as well. Both are in some ways disappointing. The ugly rubbery long EVF protector, plastic dialas on A7, and some other details. Neither the charme of a NEX-7 line nor good balance of a pseudo-retro look.
A7/r is first of its kind. If it sells well, and I think it will, you can be sure later versions will be better all around. Just compare original NEX models with the 6 and 7, for example. Sony’s only problem, or potential problem, is getting enough FE mount lenses out. We need a real system of lenses (from Sony, Sigma etc.), a variety of FL, price ranges, quality etc. And the system must not be limited to slow, small lenses to make the A7/r look small (but seems like Sony realizes that, i.e. 55 f1.8). I realize it can take years for that to happen, but the sooner it happens the more successful these cameras will be.
+1. Add vertical grip on top of that and… ugh… man… out of modern day cameras that’s pretty much the horror next to Pentax K-01.
Me too: Fugly
Ordinary DSLRs generally look just boring, this is far worse.
It is just slightly better looking then the em1. And that still consider ugly. People have to Stop thinking that everything that looks old is beautiful. The Minolta is beautiful by the way.
Lovely, solid, weather sealed FF camera. WIll sell like hot buns.
Super ugly! Like a tuned car with big spoiler, large wheels and a small motor.
The top plate looks a little crowded. I like the homage to the past but camera companies should innovate and not replicate when it comes to camera designs. Also, a camera in this range should be able to shoot 1/8000th. This camera tops out at 1/4000th.
I like it in black, at least it doesn’t pretend o e a dSLR, it is one
Who cares. It isn’t a sexy Sony !!
That “leather” on the prism housing – aa hhhhh,
…. just makes it look utterly ridiculous.
Hope the dials are practical.
I don’t care about looks. that camera is a dream come true. full frame, 16mp (sweet spot for someone like me), small size, real pdaf, great range of lenses, ovf. if there is live view with peeking (doubt it) I might switch systems in a year or two.
one more thing – it might lack af motor. which would mean no buy.
changed my mind. will miss flip out screen and low price, and possibly a little less weight. a7 it is. i would LOVE to have an ovf in samll package though.
Who cares?
Oh I think both Nikon Df and Minolta X-700 has a very nice design. On the other hand, A7r is quite uggly. But i sure want one…
UGLY. All black one looks better at least. But it’s still a bulky, overpriced DSLR. And an under-spec’d one at that. Sony A7/r is the innovative camera for the future; this Nikon is a nostalgia camera for old men. Sony just seriously needs to get lenses out, or at least help Sigma and others get lenses out for it.
It looks like 2750USD.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GD1KASM/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00GD1KASM&linkCode=as2&tag=nikorumo-20
$2999 with lens
$2750 for Body only.
All BLACK one looks good!
http://nikon-df.com/
I wouldn’t say good, but certainly looks much better, as you can’t see these moronic accents on the viewfinder housing and on some of the buttons and dials.
Lens is 50mm F/1.8
I have never seen a camera that ugly in my life. Simply.
I would not spend 500USD on an ugly camera with 1/4000 shutter, no video, 2 years old sensor and same weight as a D600.
This is a pure joke camera and except the old fan boys or old fashion 60years old guys who would sell their mother for a old camera design are going to buy this shit. And everyone around me in the photography world thinks this.
Good luck Nikon.
Especially for 2750 dollars hahahahahaha compared with 2100 for A7R … Oh my god. How can it be real ?
Well, I suppose quality costs.
Metal body, tons of manual controls, full weather sealing, large optical viewfinder, native choice of hundreds of lenses, including plenty of old, MF glass, excellent sensor, part of a real system with full native support of professional flash system (something you most likely won’t see on A7 even in next 20 years). \
😉
replay fail (re to adol)
Relatively expensive camera, the knobs are going to add costs, but not as much as in the manual knob days as I am sure those are sitting on-top of the digital encoders and no long distances mechanical links are involved. The use of the D4 sensor gives you good low light performance but at the price of using a low volume sensor. Maybe this is Nikon’s attempt to get some more sensors built to lower the cost of the D4. $2700 is well within reach of well off retirees, and might help the D4. I like the concept of the camera, but I would much rather have had the D800 sensor in it. It is not really competition for the A7 line, they are much smaller and cheaper and do not appeal to long time Nikon users who I am sure is the bulk of the market for this camera.
Right. I love my NEX-7, and the A7 does beckon, but so many happy memories with my Nikon F, FM, FE, F3, FM2, FE2, etc, plus a drawerful of lenses make the Df seem pretty tempting instead of the A7.
I guess these lenses in the drawer explains why there’s only 16 MP. These lenses really don’t stand up to modern high res digital sensors.
Good point. I’m wondering why they use D4 sensor, it is not their best sensor. Low MP for high ISO? That is a misconception. They put low MP sensor in D4 for super high FPS. I don’t see there’s a need for high FPS mode on a retro camera. That’s the only possibility, other prosumer mentality of low MP = good high ISO.
Good point. I’m wondering why they use D4 sensor, it is not their best sensor. Low MP for high ISO? That is a misconception. They put low MP sensor in D4 for super high FPS. I don’t see there’s a need for high FPS mode on a retro camera. That’s the only possibility, other prosumer mentality of low MP = good high ISO.
If you check DXOMark,
The D4 Sensor has the similar SNR as D600’s/D800’s at all ISO.(print at 8″x12″)
However, the D4 Sensor has better Dynamic than D600’s/D800’s at ISO higher than 400.
But Sony sensor has better Dynamic at ISO 100 & 200. :p
IMHO, 16MP is more than enough for 99% of user, if the 100% crop is usable.
My old lenses handle the D800 fine. Don’t know where people get the notion that we’re at some magically high resolution that lenses will not resolve it.
Maybe people get that notion from a 16 MP retro camera rumor?
‘happy memories’
indeed nostalgia is a very nice thing and might be inspiring for a while but the moment you realize that its just another tool, like similar dslrs, might be disappointing. its like shooting film – you hope something magical will happen after hitting the shutter button.
You are right in saying this camera is affordable by well of retirees, the people that this camera will appeal to. Unfortunately more and more of these retirees are dying every day, so this is hardly a growing market. But it is good to see Nikon go off in the wrong direction as Sony, Olympus, Fujifilm, Samsung and Pentax gain more market share.
I’m wondering for years now where I need a “professional flash system”…
In the studio with a Hensel or Bowens or what ever there’s only the need for a simple remote control via RF because there is nothing like TTL control or ADI or what ever…
And outdoors? The existing built in wireless control is more than enough to control a remote flash for lightening up some shadows….. Had been a bit different in old “film days” but nowadays where you can view your shots immediately afterwards I’m doing a lot more in manual mode than ever before…
But it is not a full metal body. A lot of it is plastic.
A professional flash system that almost zero professionals care to use because line-of-sight IR triggering is and always has been crappy compared to even basic radio triggers.
Nothing special there since A7 can use alpha’s IR flash triggering which, except for 1 additional group, is basically identical.
Of course, anyone sane is going to get radio triggers.
Profesional flash? Did nikon pro uses ttl nikon cls? Oooooooo k i forget that.
No movie? Cmon… 27k
Native, native, native!
IMO (!) A7/A7r = UGLY!!! Nikon Df = ULTRA COOL!!! Sorry Son y Nikon nailed it!!!
…takes me back to the 1970s… looks like this Nikkormat:
http://www.leitzmuseum.org/CameraMakes/NikonSLR/1977NikkormatFT3-1.jpg
…or the Nikon FM2
http://silverbased.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/04/mike-nika-fm2n.jpg
Df: The idea to offer wheels for everything important is really good, but the design is really ugly, a failed attempt to mix retro and modern design. I’d rather go analog and shoot an F6!
X-700: Minolta’s last good manual focus SLR, its design already dubious compared to the seminal XD7, but still better than many of today’s cameras… And fits really well into your hands with the Motor Drive 1 attached.
Don’t like it. It brings back times you shouldn’t want to go back to.
This quasi-retro design just hides the total lack of ideas with Nikon. It’s a bad sign Nikon puts so much desperate effort in pleasing customers. I’m glad I’m a Sonyan, Sony never ceases to surprise, they don’t want to please me, they force me to like whatever they bring 🙂 I don’t like the A7 design either, but I must have it…
+1
Direct controls are always good although I’d rather prefer non-dedicated programmable dials.
It reminds me of the good old days, just edgy enough in a realm of plastic squeeze bottles. A good direction to go.
Not exactly minimalist design is it!! How may knobs can you fit on a camera!!
Who cares what it looks like? If this has the sensor from the D4, just think what the high ISO performance will be like! Expensive, yes, but it’ll be a great performer in a small package.
Close to a D600/D610 (and A7?), very similar to a 6D. Nothing earth shattering and at the cost of resolution and maximum DR.
I love Sony, but this DF camera looks great, both aesthetically and specs-wise. If you already have a decent collection of Nikon lenses and don’t need more than 16MP (most people), this is the perfect camera.
Is this what you call a throw back to the past? Or a camera manufacturer stuck in the past?!?
Did I miss something? Thought the Df is a retro-styled FF DSLR which uses Nikon’s very solid offering of native glass (not bad looking either, in my opinion). But a7(R) is somewhat retro-styled FF Mirrorless camera which will have few very solid native lenses (Zeiss 24-70 & 70-200 f4 OSS, Zeiss 35 f2.8, Zeiss 55 f1.8), but can use virtually every legacy lens ever made. Not sure how anyone can draw comparison between the two cameras since they are totally different and aimed at different markets. I prefer Mirrorless since I have more than 50 legacy lenses from various manufacturers and want to use them. I’ll also probably pick up the 35mm Zeiss.
Of course, they are aimed at different people. But, apparently, a squarish top and close announcement dates are enough to make two cameras direct competitors.
if you’re not yet knee-deep in any system, and want full frame in a smallish package, both of those are worth considering.
The Df is quite a bit bigger and heavier. But I disagree, you can’t just simplify them to a “full frame camera”. One is bigger, has an OVF and an interface aiming to make every setting very visible. And it uses Nikon lenses. The other is somewhat smaller and lighter, uses the usual modern interface, has an EVF and uses Sony lenses and has the ability to adapt others. I just don’t see the audiences for both cameras intersecting much.
An ugly beast in the grand Nikon tradition of functional, ugly beasts.
16mp Sony Full Frame sensor?
Could this be the sensor that will be in the NEX 5 body that Admin posted about? Hello Sony A5!
It’s Nikon sensor from D4. You know – this camera that runs for 6000$.
I’m not really old, 45y, but my sight is worsening very fast. I truly doubt that the aging crowd will be able to see those little numbers on the dials easily. Wait, they put a small lcd on top to aleviate matters!
I won’t buy it, but the “pure” BS aside, it looks like a wedding photographer dream camera. Low MP (faster editing) , excellent High iso, visible top controls (can operate without LCD glaring around), fast AF (I suppose), if it has a silent mode it’s a home run.
I like it!
Ugly – Beautiful….wie im Kindegarten!
The body only is $2750 🙂
$700 extra money than D610
Less than half the price of D4.
(equally relevant comparison)
Not really. According to Nikon (see roadmap/lineup piramid)it sits between the D610 and D800, well below the D4 class. As expected based on its features.
Ugly, to big. I expect something smaller like Nikon FE, Minolta x700 or Pentax ME super.
I guess I’ll go for this instead of A7. Full AF with Nikon glass, full manual control of everything I need related to exposure, D4 sensor in it and price seems to be also really good considering that mirror box isn’t cheap nor is optical viewfinder. This does look like a proper tool for AF-D lenses and all that lovely old manual Nikon glass. Well done Nikon!
So what foes this have over the much cheaper D610 or the similarly priced D800? Nikon didn’t even mention about the focusing screen, whether it is user replaceable, etc… Yes, you “might” have the good iso performance (not sure if it has the same circuitry that makes the D4 a D4). Compatible with old Nikkor without the screen to support it is useless. Nikon Liveview is so much worse compared to Sony. This is really just another retro spinoff camera…
controls
Dials… that go up to 11.
Damn right that camera seems to go up to 11.
That being said, I would have expected a 24 or 36mp camera and not 16. It was probably a very deep nikon in house project to lure the hipsters.
I like it. If I had cash to burn, I would go to the shop, check it out, see how it feels with a 35mm ze, and make the jump if I like it.
Not many cameras go up to 11. I would love to see a poll on which cameras people think go up to 11. Even the BBC player’s volume goes up to 11.
fully agree. Nikon was very close to release a good cam, this is a big no go for me. I really don’t understand how could this be in development for 4 years without realising following:
– if you going to target customers with big collection of manual glass, give them bloody focusing aids, this doesn’t have any
– if you going to target admirers of traditional controls put the bloody exposure compensation dial on the correct side of the camera
– there’s no need for PASM on camera like this
– shot themselves to foot by omitting aperture rings, you cannot have a camera like this with all the fancy dials on top and not having option to control aperture on the lens
– for G lenses shooters this brings absolutely nothing to their shooting experience
– D4 sensor – wow, fine, but honestly, is it really really that good? people are saying it’s got crazy high ISO and so on, yes – it belongs to camera like D4 which fast and is built to utilise it, this camera has just sensor from D4, the rest is D6x0
– price – why on earth does it cost so much in the UK?
I’ll keep watching Sony reports about A7r and might pull the trigger on it, I’d be happy just with 35 and 55 lenses and later add something (hopefully they’ll make it) like 24-27mm. Or I’ll just keep my already excellent X-Pro1.
Hexx, get a cv35mm 1.2 with a 7r and you’ll spend just a bit more than the Df but you’ll have a much better MF experience.
This camera does look good, but I think it really needed more mp to really push the interest a bit more. I don’t know about the rest (g, ai, etc) from experience and usability (I only owned modern nikon bodies) but I am inclined to think, after reading your comment, that this cam is for hipsters.
Ze should of courseread ‘zf’
what you mena instead of a7. They completely different cameras. If you want the a7 then you don’t need this huge fugly(nikon fm was a beauty but not this) dslr. IF you need a nikon dslr than why you even looking at a7. Got legacy or leica lens? again a7. Want to save on ff lenses, nikon the way to go. In fact why you not buying d600
I have both, M and F mount glass. You can LOL as much as you can but I couldn’t care less if one is mirror less and other isn’t. I’m looking to buy a camera which will be used mostly when I can’t use my film cameras and Sigma DP2M, which means above ISO400 and will probably replace my X-Pro1 system. And once I have ILC camera I need to have a bag so I’m not really sold on ‘small camera’ BS, once you take two-three lenses you need a bag. I use different tools for different purposes – as simple as that.
@ hexx
none of that made any sense. Your xpro1 is a ILC. So what do you mean once you have a ILC you will replace xpro1? Not that I care. And wtf you mean “that means iso400” lol a camera that goes above iso400? performs well at high iso…which any camera does these days? All i can make out is you have some cameras and you don’t need a bag and you don’t care about Mirrorless and size is what…BS? some how all this have to do with a7 and df…urghh my head
let me reply bit by bit…
“So what do you mean once you have a ILC you will replace xpro1” – what I said once I have ILC with me I have few lenses so I have bag with me anyway, if I want to go out light I take X100 or M6 with 50 f/1.5 lens
“And wtf you mean “that means iso400″ lol a camera that goes above iso400? ” – I shoot on film, both 35mm and medium format and in addition to that also on Sigma DP2M – to keep quality as best as possible I use these cameras up to ISO400
“All i can make out is you have some cameras and you don’t need a bag and you don’t care about Mirrorless and size is what…BS? some how all this have to do with a7 and df…urghh my head” – must be hard to understand for some, that’s fine. I have several cameras and I use them for different purposes. I don’t believe in ‘one tool for everything’ mantra. And as mentioned in the first paragraph, having mirror less full frame camera doesn’t make any difference to me in comparison with full frame SLR, once you put lenses on these bodies the argument about size and weight is just silly.
The Sigma cams with their Foveon sensors are known to have outstanding quality below ISO 400 but have a lot of noise above
so you want a camera that has the D4 sensor, D610 electrónics and its more expensive then a D800… ok…
yes, what’s wrong with that? D800 is 36mp dSLR optimised to be used with crippled G lenses, my focus is AF-D and old manual glass and good old controls via dials.
But I will wait for user reports, I’m not in a rush. Ideally I’d get both Df and A7 and try them out for few days to make decision.
If it was cheaper, I would be interested too, just for the dials. With some SLII lenses 🙂
It would be interesting what they have done with the viewfinder. It would be great to finally have live histogram overlay.
“live histogram” in the view finder?
Something my “old” A55 from 2011 has… (and one of some reasons to switch from Canon (20D) to Sony in 2011)
I am confused as to what your point is, could you clarify?
@Vlad: I wanted to express that a lot of features Canon or Nikon fanboys (I know you are none) claim to be quite innovative have been around for some time with other brands…
I’m always surprised when I’m showing experienced Canikon photographers my Alphas and that they have e.g. autofocus during video – most of them think it’s an invention of Canon with the 70D… Or that histogram in the viewfinder…
And not to mention focus peaking! I’m waiting for the moment Canikon will have that feature…
@Achim I see. I just would like somebody to make a live histogram overlayed in an OVF. Which would require a second sensor, but hey 🙂
@Vlad: ok I see your point but I think a more complex overlay LCD in an OVF would worsen the quality of the OVF itself and even if not it adds complexity not needed with an EVF… (I love the K.I.S.S principle)
And I can compare really good OVFs with the Sony EVFs as two of my close friends are using D3x/D3s and I also have some old Minolta bodies (and an Exakta Varex…. 🙂 🙂 )
During bright sunshine I prefer a D3s/x but in all other situations I really prefer the A77/A99 EVF and in the dark (I do a lot concert photography) I love it.
And I like the ability to review pictures/videos in the view finder without other people (concerts/crowds) able to look at my pictures…
@achim I largely prefer an EVF too. But an OVF has its appeal 🙂
I don’t expect anything done to VF, trust me, Nikon just re-hashed whatever they had in the warehouse and put it together. I remember reading somewhere that due to lower sales of DSLRs they’re now trying to maximise profits.
I believe there’s no surprise left, this is it as we see it, sensor from D4 and the rest from D610 with retro controls. The only bit of info I’m waiting for is if you can use aperture ring on AF-D lenses. I know this isn’t the case on cheaper bodies only on the more expensive ones.
You are probably right. I expected that the Sony push will motivate at least one company to make some really outstanding OVF. In any case it is nice to see where the industry has been going for the last 2-3 years.
Ah, man! I forgot about those SL II lenses. I had the 40mm. It made my 5D2 into an M9 with video.
Damn!
I find that beautiful and the sony very s..t ugly! And we want to talk about sensor? D4 sensor vs a7r aka purple fringe? (and i am not mentioning the fact that sony can’t even use well his own sensors LOL!!) ahaha sar you’re so patetic
or to get A7r? 🙂 or maybe keep what I have for the time being, to see how quickly will Sony and other release lenses
Why do you sound like a teenager now hexx? These are expensive toys, son.
Are you sure you are going to use it?
torn between these two i was, now it’s clear to me that Df is a no go for me – expensive is relative term, but Df is just £1000 more than it should be
hexx, as a Nikon shooter myself, I partly get it.
I don’t shoot old lens, so the appeal is Fast low light AF , CAF. PRO Sports
And even though I am a huge fan of the current Nikon glass, the New “Fast” Zeiss SSM lens are making me a ZEISS Fanboy. AF on f1.4 Zeiss with Focus Peaking is a Joy to me. that was not the same with the D800+f1.4.
EVF for me, seems to be better if I have to manual Focus.
Or I am trying to tweak the Exposure live.
imho, the EVF is ONLY going to get Bigger (and 4m res), with Higher and Higher RES. (how far will the OVF advance in the next year)
and how many more “select-able” overlay info will they be able to fit into the future EVFs?
The BIG feature for me as a RAW shooter is the ZEBRA Highlight warnings. Knowing “where” and “how much” is waaaay more important to me vs Histogram .. OR doing a chimp (really quickly) that’s history to me now.
Now when I have to Manual focus in DMF … with Peaking, auto Zoom to 100% in DMF, and Zebra … SONY just has to bump the EVF to 4m , make it faster on the pan … then OVF is “completely” DEAD to me. It is the Future ! I never bet on a dead horse, because I always want to go with the one that is moving the market. Nikon was, SONY “is”.
and they Manf and own a lot of Patents that will change things as well 🙂
Cameras are Electronics now … go with an Electronics manf. for the innovation and the Future.
and IF, I want to use old glass … with Metabones adapter … I can shoot it ALL.
just my view. from an NPS.
agreed, that was the last bit of puzzle for me when it comes to Df – no focusing aid for MF
Nikon glass is good over Sony glass only if you already own it. Only.
This camera remind me of my first camera the nikon FM2 which I bought 30 years ago with my student saving.
This design for today standards is good only to keep the thing on the shelf as a paper weight.
A7 design or Olympus OMD design is as old fashion as a brand should go: a touch of retro with contemporary materials and touch and feels.
the only company who managed to achieve retro look with ergonomics is Fuji, where Oly and Sony are taking modern approach with traditional looks but not controls. both ways are good and choice is ours to decide what’s good for us, this Df is confused at best
Does anybody at Nikon think, tons of tiny buttons are better than a got designed and customizable menu??
Tons of tiny buttons make a good retro design? (I would not like to try this in winter with gloves!)
I would prefer 36 MPix and have the option to down sample it to 18 MPix or use the the high resolution.
This is innovation a la Nikcanon, nothing really new!
Sorry, Nikon, I am glad, that I sold my Nikon gear after 25 years being a Nikonian – but I am missing the good i-TTL flash system!
You are right, LensIsAll, when does Sony come with a wireless flash system?
I can’t believe they put their limited resources in this girly stuff.
I have no lenses for this camera, but if Sony makes a compact Minolta X-700 look alike with an A mount, I might be tempted to buy it and use all of my Minolta AF lenses.
why the X-700? Minolta made many cameras better looking then the X700 (that started the plastic era for minolta), an SRT, XD7/XD11, XK/XM are way cooler, at least for me
Oh yea, my first real camera, a Minolta SRT101b Still the most beautiful camera ever made… Would be nice with a digital version of that, BuT smaller of course and a with a global shutter for silent shooting.
Agreed. The say that the claim to fame for these old Minolta lenses is/was that they had the most consistent color quality from lens to lens than any other manufacturer.
Minolta XD5 had plastic top cover before x700. Nevertheless it still withstood my abuse. Wonderful camera…
I want a Minolta Himatic rangefinder design.
this is no innovation, just a change of clothes for old stuff.
still better than canon (canon who?) but I only see good marketing promos and no real new substance
So D600 crashed into the rear of F3, and then got stomped on each side.. ugh. And then they pair this.. $2750.. something, with 50/1.8G LoL! As much as I love my D700 and Nikon in general, this thing seems to be just a desperate way to grab few extra bucks. At least I hope it is, and not a truly “prestige” item in their mind.
+1 desperate move.
If this camer has 24MP from D600, 51 AF point from D700/D800, and priced at $2000, maybe it will replace my D700.
Maybe it isn’t a good angle to show this camera. I’ll wait and see in real life. Very interesting camera.
If it’s all black, 36MP, all manual, oh yeah! I’ll be back to Nikon in no time.
It’s 16mp and is available in black.
The Df seems to be something like the (BMW) Mini, the New Beetle or this FIAT Cinquecento: new but not revolutionary technology packaged old styled.
Just read the spec. Looks like an awesome camera. 1400 shots per charge VS 340 shots per charge.
to be truly “retro” battery life should be two years with a single charge but the memory card capacity should be limited to 36 pictures regardless of card size….
Now, if they ONLY could manage to squeeze ONE more button for movie record…..
>]
*tongue in cheek*
Well, the PRICE is certainly ugly!
If they would have diched the pentaprism and mirror for the evf they would have had the room for ibis.
But this is Nikon so no real inovation just a retro suit. And one not retro enough. This looks like its from the 90′
I dont think any design from the modern 90′ is considered good looking today nor does it stur the retro nostalgia.
I bet Pentax will be next.
I hope they spend the mirrorbox money on IBIS and 36MP sensor, though.
They sure wont on design.
If only Nikon had included a few more meshing dials, they could all then have performed the secondary function of analogue clock to go with the retro look.
Interesting article from Thom Hogan:
http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/the-nikon-customer-leak.html
Interesting how he totally avoids to talk about EVF/OVF, AF performance when using Liveview, AF for video etc etc.
Could it be so that he would like to have more wide-angle primes,
but doesn’t care much himself about EVF’s?
Anyways, I don’t think having a few more expensive primes their lineup would change that much for Nikon. Heck, if the price difference would have been large enough, it might have scared even more people away.
Silver is cheapo ugly. The black is ok.
Well looks wise, it’s nothing to write home about. If indeed this FF camera is using a 16MP sensor, that’s what everyone should be happy about, instead I see nothing but confusing comments. If people want a 24MP or 36MP FF camera, Nikon and Sony already makes those. If you want HD video and all kinds of other features, you have that too.
If the sensor information is correct, then finally someone listened to photographers that want a pure photography camera, with the best image sensor they can get within a given budget. When new cameras first come out, the first thing everyone wants to see is the high ISO right? Well now you are getting what you really want and need. Sure the price is high, but it’s starting out at about half the price of the D4 when it was released.
I would rather see the D4 sensor in a D700 style body to be honest… but at least Nikon is getting away from the megapixel race with this ONE model. If sony made the A7 with less than 20MP I would buy it immediately. all these 24MP FF cameras are nothing but APS-C 12MP pixels, I still don’t’ get why everyone is all excited over FF with high pixel counts, not everyone wants or needs it.
I can’t wait to see someone walking around with a 70-200 f2.8 attached to this camera 🙂
won’t look so much different from a Alpha 55 equipped with such a lens and I used that combination (Sigma 2.8/70…200) very often in 2011/12. And it felt quite comfortable even w/o an extra vertical grip (there is one from a chinese company).
and it looks much better than a D3s or D4 with a small prime lens… 🙂 🙂
I understand your point Achim, but where would that retro look go, with a huge modern lens attached? If Nikon is trying to lure “older” fans into this camera with its look, a new range of dedicated “retro styled” lenses is also on the way, meaning more milking, as that “new” 50mm.
If not, that nice retro looking camera will look awkward. At least to me. Perhaps the black version is more stealthy, but the silver one will be a “punch in the eye” 🙂
(Not that the aspect is so relevant to me, being just a tool to take photos)
“a new range of dedicated “retro styled” lenses is also on the way, meaning more milking, as that “new” 50mm. ”
The DF will work natively with honest to goodness real “retro” lenses going back decades.Retro design without functionality is pretty pointless, I for one like the control by dials
The Nikon DF doesn’t look bad, what matters is how it fits in the hand & how the images look. As for the Minolta X-700, well I found that camera rather unreliable when compared to other minolta cameras like the SRT, XE-7 or XD-11 (i used them all). So if we are going to do the memory lane thing, why not go for the flagship XK, which was one of the best designed pro cameras in its day (my picks were the Pentax LX, the Nikon F3, the Leica R6.2 and the Minolta XK)
Remember the architectural law, form follows function. Therefore ease of use and images files are first on the list of a great camera. Pretty is nice, but unless you are going to frame the camera, the camera shape is second.
I feel that the a7 fits my hand well enough and the files should be superb. The Olympus felt better to hold and use, but the files can’t compare at 16 mp, so I plan on going with the Sony (tried them both at the NY show)
On thing to keep in mind, the DSLR camera shape evolved over decades, and making a better ergonomic design may not be that easy.
X700 unreliable compared to XD11????
I have difficulty believing that as the XD series (and the Leica R3 series which used the same basic design) was famous for electrical problems
There are a couple capacitors in the X700 which regularly go wrong but they sit just under the top plate and you can replace them yourself easily enough
Otherwise it is a reasonably reliable camera
I think this new Nikon is beautiful, especially compared to A7. But it is big,again compared to A7, and lens selection is limited to Nikon mount only. I know they make a lot of lenses, but I don’t want to buy new Nikon lens. Plus A7 also can take Nikon lens. So A7 is still a better option IMO.
I think that’s “just you”.
Surprisingly, a lot of people prefer 24 and 36 MP to 16 MP…
Well I was waiting on this Nikon because I was expecting something similar in size to A7 (IE the same as an old manual film SLR) with all the hype surrounding this thing, Since I have Nikon AF lenses I figured I’d wait and see before preordering A7R, Well I’m just off to go carry through with that preorder! The Nikon is far too bid, it’s a just a D800 brick in a new skirt, a fugly one at that. Is the silver finish the actual metal because it looks like cheap toy plastic! Black looks at least less gimmick like but it still all appears to just be a dressup of an existing product rather than any kind of innovation. I’m not really surprised, so yeh anyway, now I need an A7R!
Sigh another overpriced FF camera
Who talked about 16 MP D4 sensor?The same that talked about hybrid viewfinder or mirror less?
Who talked about the 16 MP D4 sensor?The same that talked about mirror less or hybrid viewfinder?
Amazon’s listing leaked. It has the same sensor and processor as the D4. EXPEED3, 16.2mp FX CMOS.
Kinda like it. Kudos for the bold attempt.
The FM was one of the most beautifully designed SLRs of the old days (Olympus OM1 might have beaten it to it). I had an FM and sold it at once, not because of the camera, but because of the lens (43-86, a dog). The Df has the basic DNA, but they have ruined it completely, now this is an ugly camera! I have a hard time deciding which one is the ugliest of the new retro styled cameras: Olympus, Sony or Nikon. I recall me thinking Yek! when I first saw the Olympus, then I saw the Sony, oh no, why?! So after some thinking the reward for the ugliest of them all goes to… Nikon! Let’s get back to modern styled cameras, give us the NEX style back!
And still, people are wet just because it says Nikon on it. I guess if Nikon launches a Holga in a fm2 casing people would buy it blindly.
The answer is in your title.
“f…ugly”
my two cents.
Nothing I’m interested in. This makes me feel really good about my preordered A7!
Uff, too retro for me. Back to the 80’s= OK!! Back to the 70’s=Nono
It looks cheap retro too. That top looks like a wonderland of plastic. Not what I would call inviting.
Hmm…back to the 80’s. Makes me think sweaters, puffy hair and movies like the Goonies. Ok, I’m in!
The Nikon is an amazing tool for photographers that grew up using manual cameras, lenses, and spent many hours in the dark room.
I expect the majority of Sony users in this forum to bash the camera as I found more here care about the technology inside the camera than the technique and artful composition needed to take some amazing images.
Way to go admin. Another “Sony is better than this camera or that camera”. Get over the insecurity and post some useful links about lighting, guest post to exciting locations, and other things that embrace the art of photography and not the art forum negativity.
This camera is drop dead gorgeous. But so is an A7. It just depends what you like.
One thing I liked about the Sony 850 and 900 was the dna resemblance to the XD-11, perhaps Minolta’s most beautiful camera.
Aside from looks, IQ is the real criteria. Luckily for the consumer, Sony and Nikon are pushing each other, leaving Leica and Canon resting on their laurels.
Out of all the lens comparisons posted on alpharumors recently, the one that amazed me had five brands of glass on an A7R. I once owned a whole bunch of Leitz and Minolta glass, and was interested to see how well the Minolta MD glass did compared to M-Series Summicrons. Who da thunk?
New Nikon DF Appears on Amazon; $2,746.95 for Body Only :
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3792/10680784856_c818e6fece_o.png
http://www.thephoblographer.com/2013/11/04/new-nikon-df-appears-amazon-2746-95-body/
The 36MP A7r looks like a bargain !
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3797/10549831816_15ff6e63a5_o.jpg
U_G_L_Y. Would I buy it? Maybe…..
I like the retro look its better then a7
nikon made this to reduce nikonian from buying a7, not switching. They would never switch from nikon.
This is Nikon, even its THE SAME AND SAME AGAIN Dslr they will sell well.
This thing only have RADICAL DESIGN to respons from a7 technology, size and price, its still big, still ovf, still big native lenses, 200 pt dxomark more than a7,
who need innovation? Who need technology? Who need movie? Those are nikonian, they even still using nokia instead android, never using nfc nor apps.
but generation move on
When sony cant compete with Dslr, they leave Dslr
When nikon cant compete with technology, they leave them.
Someday well see nikon df mark 7 16mp (same as nikon d5) that not using a single electrical tool at all, it even not using battery and compete with a1. With organic sensor that have 3d amoled screen featuring a real time smart adaptative hud assist and a voice command setting preset, etc. Which is very handy tool to helping us to make a good call, and 3rd party app developer can even make a blind ppl can take a good photo.
Top shutter speed is 1/4000th. They couldn’t do better than that for $2750?
Quite frankly it looks like the Nikon bosses said that, “We need to make some profits quick!” They then sent an intern to the parts warehouse and had her assemble a camera from all of the old and new parts that she could find. This is the result. It will be a great addition to the collection of all Nikon collectors.
Hey..it has 921K dots LCD screen.
Wait, 1.4 Million dots on A7s?
Make it look like the 1967 Minolta SRT-101!
So close, yet so far away. It “looks” cool. But, no video? Come on, this is 2013. Also, the price is just a rip-off.
The A7 is a much better camera for $1000 less. If you want to look cool, buy the A7 and take the extra $1000 and get an old Nikon F body on ebay for about $150. Then get some hipster glasses and tight pants (another $200).
Now, hide your A7 in your camera bag and walk around holding the Nikon F. Then, if you need to take a picture, quickly pull out the A7, snap the shot, and put it away before anyone notices. Also, you can say things like “only film can truly capture a scene”.
Now, you can spend the extra $650 on condoms because you will be so cool and attractive that girls will literally be throwing themselves at you.
I lOLed bro..
It reminds me of Minolta dynax 60. Small grip and vertical wheel. Not a winner.
Asking if a Nikon is ugly on a Sony site, hmmm I’m sure we know what you’re going to get!
Personally I think its gorgeous.
It’s good that Nikon is getting a next-generation D700. However, when form doesn’t follow function (i.e. there’s a reason why the vast majority of dSLRs don’t look like the be-knobbed SLRs of yore; semi-flush buttons and protected knobs last longer to abuse)… what you have is a device that is fresh now, but won’t stand the test of time from neither a functional nor aesthetic perspective.
Call me crazy, but I think it’s GORGEOUS. I have never been this ready to switch camera brands over something so petty lol. But seriously, it’s beautiful, and I would instantly buy something like this if Sony made one. <3
Hey, some people are into thrift shops and dumpster diving.
Good, honest camera. But $3000?
Actually I prefer the look of this to a7’s
Out dated technology, amateur specs (1/4000 shutter), unattractive looking, big and heavy…in fact the only thing upscale about this camera is its price, so what’s to love?
The DF did help make up my mind about a couple of things: begin selling all my Nikon gears and move to Sony A7/R for its advanced technologies (focus peaking, micro-lens adjustment, 1/8000 max shutter speed, tilting screen, video features, usable live view, etc.) while saving a grand of my hard earned cash – easy decision!
I like that outlook,frankly speaking.. compared to A7/A7r, DF is way better.. well balanced retro design… like pentax/fuji/olympus do… 🙁
Why not 4 MP full frame? 16 MP isn’t enough retro i think.
+1
🙂
That leather design on the hump is ridiculous. They make a camera that is supposed to be a purely functional photographic tool and they already fail at design level. Or do Nikon shooters actually hold their cameras by the prism?
If new Nikon will looks like on picture on top, that’s will be great! For me, this old design is hit, better than mild A7 body. But true is, design is not most important 🙂
The A7/R was the ugliest camera but not anymore.
Thank you Nikon!
i like my D800 very much … but this … this is poor … this is not a digital fm2 …. i like using my f and m glas on my nex and looking forward to get my A7r in a few weeks
If you want to talk ugly -A99, the Nikon looks how cameras used to practical and functional, the A900 looked like that.
The R7 has a bit of that look, the A99 looks like it has a fat suit on.
“the A99 looks like it has a fat suit on”
LMAO
Never was a fan of that look.
After seriously looked at the Nikon DF, I vote X-700. The retro style is not what I want, but X-700 looks better than N-DF.
And I think A7 series is not good enough although it looks already better than X-700 and of course N-DF. Hope Sony can have a even better looking A9 with more controls.
Forget about 16mp! Even 24 is not enough:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/camera-reviews/sony/a7r/#IQC
I dunno, the OMD-EM1 pretty much nailed the retro look in my opinion, followed by the A7/A7r, the Nikon? I feel it took too much retro kool-aid
Looks really ugly the Sony looks a million times better.
I love how old MF Nikon lenses work much better with Sony NEX bodies
-Focus assists are much MUCH better than what Nikon has to offer.
-NEX meters the scene as you change the aperture on the lens. With Nikon you have to meter with the camera body and set the aperture on the lens accordingly (while taking the camera off of your eye).
-You can see the real DOF in the viewfinder.
Ikr! For such a old glass orientated camera, I’m surprised Nikon make 0 effort in making it easier to focus those old glasses, heck the the focusing screen is fixed so bye bye to split prism -.-
Funny how on dpreview, lot of people comparing new Nikon with Sony’s A7/A7r, epsecially the pricing part…
Ugly or not, it’s an ergonomical / functional disaster.
Examples :
1) lockable exposure dial on the left shoulder. Not only a normal dial on the left shoulder of any camera is daft as it forces one to loose one’s grip over the camera when shooting, adding a lock in there is even worse. And even worser than the worse is the fact that Nikon decided to put in this very impractical location a setting that’s frequently used – exposure compensation. Completely, utterly, stupid.
2) The tiny PASM dial is badly located and actually has to be LIFTED to be turned. Now that’s just beyond stupid.
3) The shutter speed can’t be turned with one finger. You’ll have to loose your grip over the camera to use it. Again, stupid.
And I could bring up many more idiocies, like putting the (one and only ! on a $3000 camera) SD card compartment under the battery flap, putting the mirror lockup and timer on the same dial, keeping the AF lever / button at the same place where it currently is on most Nikon cameras, which is bad as it’s unreachable when using telephoto lenses, etc.
This camera has been designed by morons, there is no other way to put it.
MTLAB–
Thanks for taking the time to make that commentary, I was wondering about the functionality myself, and share your concerns.
It’s interesting to read the comments over this camera and its mainly the price they are complaining about. It’s like last year when the a99 came out and it was compared to the d600. It seems the A7 is having an effect. That “special edition” 50/1.8 doesn’t have the best MTF why didn’t they make a special edition 58/1.4 as the newly released version is almost as good as the FE 55mm. Mr Rockwell in his review of the old 58 claims this was the lens that helped nikon become the leica killer.
I like it and depending on how it works It may be my second body after I get the A7. I don’t like that leather like part on the top at all though. I do think it may be a bit overpriced when compared to the A7 but I have never felt I needed 24mp. I would not mind 12mp, but that’s just me. There are so many good lenses. I could get that wont have a zeiss price tag with this camera. All I need is a 24mm 35mm 50mm 85mm 135mm and maybe a fish eye.
My words exactly about 6mp in my Dynax 7D, but not anymore. A 6mp sensor records shape, contrast and color wonderfully. However, the texture of things starts being visible with higher resolutions. Look at the 7R samples on IR, you can literally touch the fabric! The 7’s JPEGs are worse. I also tried RAWs and the difference is still there although barely noticeable. I’d say 24 or 36 would be great, probably even 24 would be enough for close portraits.
Why is Nikon shying away from tiltable live view screen on its pro gears? To me a tiltable (better still, full articulated) live view screen is a feature I cannot live without.
Act of desperation!
A retro-styled camera designed to use with the original lenses, for those that can afford to relive their youth
The concept seems reasonable to me – far more sensible when you think about it than a retro-styled camera designed to use a brand new range of lenses (ie. the A7)!
> ugly or not?
Fugly. Fad.
The Minolta X700 with its 30MP sensor media kicks anything “new” and looks way better IMHO. Just need a good enlarger to print. From a techie standpoint, old is new again. Shoot film. Play with digital.
Just as far as looks go, I think Panasonic struck a nice balance with the GX7. It gives simple nod to the past with the silver-topped version, but beyond that, it’s not trying to be something it’s not.
I’m 33 years old. I think the camera looks good. But at the same time, I think Nikon is not moving forward. I will be soon be getting the new mirrorless FF. Going to wait and see if sony will release an even smaller mirrorless FF. One without a viewfinder. It’s an exciting time.
Let me start out by saying that I’m surprised to see this camera released for production, the rumor mill information was all over the map leading me to believe it was 6 months or more away. Not being one to dwell on looks, my only comment is that the styling is similar to cameras of the 70’s era. Nothing wrong with that I’ve used and loved those cameras but its now 2013 and I’m used to the controls of a modern camera and would never go back. The specs are confusing, it’s not set up to be a sports camera like the D4 so why the 16MP sensor? Wouldn’t the guts of the 610 make more sense. And the max shutter speed 1/4000 on a camera of this price? The savings from leaving out the video mode should have paid for the best shutter and sensor. Not my cup of tea.
I have this camera for a moths. Own a D3s and a D4. Perviously D700 and so on all the way back to NIKON F. Always needed a motor winder or motor drive, Film bodies, battery grip for D70, D90, D300, D700, just to have a better handling with the grip, specially when using bigger lenses. Most of the time I don’t even operated the motor drive on the film cameras. Winding the camera manually. Todays pro lenses really monsters and need a body with an extended bottom to get a better grip, if you using a pro zooms, even todays new primes is double the size as the old same AI lenses was. Acquiring the new Nikon Df, I get exited, happy to get a full frame camera in a much manageable package then the big D3, D4’s. So I bought the first Df in a rush, don’t even realized it is NO optional battery grip, also it is not possible to create one, by third party manufacturers, because the stupid memory card placement, on the bottom of the camera. The camera is built solid, the images the camera producing is slightly better then my D4. BUT! . . . but . . . It is unusable with big pro lenses, other then the small AI-S primes. Mounting the 17-35/2.8, the 24-70/2.8 the camera is UGLY! . . . UGLY, and handling is uncomfortable. Never mind a big 70-200/2.8 lens or bigger. Basically, it is a very expensive point & shoot camera with limited use. The lenses I conformably using on this camera is the 18/4, 20/4, 28-50/3.5 zoom, the 135/2.8 and the 200/4. Yes, it is a walk around camera with limited use. Az a loyal Nikon user from a loooong time, it is a first time I’m totally disappointed of Nikon. The stupid placement of the memory card, next to the battery is the biggest mistake, Nikon ever made. Nikon has to learn from Fuji, the X-T1, it is a beautiful form-design and a logical one, with including an optional battery grip. Nikon my has to hire the guy who designed the Fuji X-T1 to redesign the Nikon Df or a future Df.