Official Announcement of Nikon Df

[swifty]

off-topic:
I wish Nikon Df is successful so that they will come with the DX version of the model
As it is, I don't think I 'can afford' the Df, just like I can't 'afford' D800 or D600. I'm satisfied with my D7000, if there is a Df with aps-c sensor I'm sure to get it.
Does anyone also wish for a DX sensor Df?

Absolutely . I think a lite DX version (retro styling optional) would be fantastic. But we would need some small DX primes to really maximise its potential. We only have the 35mm/1.8G DX currently (excluding the DX macros). How bout a small 23mm/1.8G DX for the kit lens? Just have a look at the Fuji X-Pro range to see what DX lenses are missing in the Nikon line up.

 

[ageha]

Absolutely . I think a lite DX version (retro styling optional) would be fantastic. But we would need some small DX primes to really maximise its potential. We only have the 35mm/1.8G DX currently (excluding the DX macros). How bout a small 23mm/1.8G DX for the kit lens? Just have a look at the Fuji X-Pro range to see what DX lenses are missing in the Nikon line up.

I think they rather add such a model to their CX line. Once Sony introduces cheaper full-frame models like an A5 next year I doubt there will be any room for relatively expensive APS-C systems. Maybe Ricoh is doing it.

 

[MacroMarlin]

Wish they revive the development of digital backs for SLR instead, particularly the F3/hp, FM2. etc...

 

[ageha]

Wish they revive the development of digital backs for SLR instead, particularly the F3/hp, FM2. etc...

Isn't that history? I don't think they will go back in time.

 

[diediealsomustdive]

Yes I have!

I (still) have the F2 photomic, F2 (plane prism, no meter), Nikkormat FTn, FM2, F601m, etc.

But I honestly doubt if ANY of those old Nikkor lenses (AI, pre-AI) will stand up to the scrutiny of a modern digital sensor. I kind of expected what you said earlier to be true, ie, that the old nostalgic folks like us will eventually move up to more modern glasses after we have seen how bad those old lenses really are after getting the Df and that will generate more business for Nikon.

Well actually not. If one really need to go retro, some of the pre Ai, AI & AIS lenses works pretty well.

I have used some on the D4, they hold up pretty well

I have used quite a few Ai or Ai converted lenses on my D800 and they stand up to scrutiny very well, just as LM said. I know of at least one person who swears by the old 5cm f/2 Nikkor-S (not H) 9 blade version, I have the 7-blade version but not converted to Ai, so can't test on FX yet. He also swears by the Nikkor-O 35mm f/2.

So far I have tested E75-150, Ai80-200/4, AiS80-200/4, K24/2.8, Ai50/2 on the D800 and I am pleased with the results.

I have used the 5cm f/2 Nikkor-S, 10.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor-P, 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S and 105mm f/2.5 Nikkor-P.C. only on DX. So have to wait and see how they perform on Df.

I believe the old glasses are all good.

 

[swifty]

I think they rather add such a model to their CX line. Once Sony introduces cheaper full-frame models like an A5 next year I doubt there will be any room for relatively expensive APS-C systems. Maybe Ricoh is doing it.

Sadly I think you're right. Though APS-C sensors will always be an order of magnitude cheaper to produce and I just don't think Nikon nor Canon are really doing their APS-C customers justice (lens-wise). And that's their biggest customer base.
But I don't think it should have to be an expensive APS-C camera though(ie. not exactly following the Df concept which remains to be seen exactly what it is to command the premium pricing that it does). Just make it small and light without too much clutter but without over simplifying the controls either.
Again, I think Fuji are doing the right things with their X series, especially in the lens department.

 

[ageha]

Sadly I think you're right. Though APS-C sensors will always be an order of magnitude cheaper to produce and I just don't think Nikon nor Canon are really doing their APS-C customers justice (lens-wise). And that's their biggest customer base.
But I don't think it should have to be an expensive APS-C camera though(ie. not exactly following the Df concept which remains to be seen exactly what it is to command the premium pricing that it does). Just make it small and light without too much clutter but without over simplifying the controls either.
Again, I think Fuji are doing the right things with their X series, especially in the lens department.

Yup, Fuji is already there and I guess that's about it. I don't see anybody else entering that market anymore. I don't see why all companies need to have a similar portfolio, every camera maker should do something completely different.

 

[swifty]

Yup, Fuji is already there and I guess that's about it. I don't see anybody else entering that market anymore. I don't see why all companies need to have a similar portfolio, every camera maker should do something completely different.

Yes, I also agree about pushing the boundaries. Not saying that everyone needs the same portfolio. Just that I think there's a market, possibly a significant one that Nikon's not paying attention to. They already have the customer base for it since these DX lenses will be good for any Nikon APS-C user. I don't want to speak for everybody but I think the 35/1.8G DX is a great lens so its curious why there aren't more small relatively fast DX primes.

 

[kei1309]

Even though APS-C is cheaper, camera manufacturers know that the customers are all heading for FF.

FF cameras are now the new Mid-range APS-C cameras. More and more newbies are jumping into FF.

It makes sense for camera manufacturers to chase FF cameras as that's what the market wants. It makes no sense to give most of the customers who want FF quality what the minority wants: cheaper cameras even though they're just APS-C.

 

[user12343]

FF bodies maybe cheaper compared to few years back, but killer problem is FF lens are still as expensive as ever.

 

[jeff7id]

FF bodies maybe cheaper compared to few years back, but killer problem is FF lens are still as expensive as ever.

Agree with you. Nowdays new lenses become more & more expensive. Just see how expensive is the new Zeiss Otus lens and still manual ... :bigeyes:

It's time to go back to the old Nikkor legacy lenses and become pure photography ;p

 

[ageha]

FF bodies maybe cheaper compared to few years back, but killer problem is FF lens are still as expensive as ever.

They can just sell them for less again like 1.5 decades ago. All those years with APS-C systems jacked up the FF prices artificially high.

 

[user12343]

Agree with you. Nowdays new lenses become more & more expensive. Just see how expensive is the new Zeiss Otus lens and still manual ... :bigeyes:

It's time to go back to the old Nikkor legacy lenses and become pure photography ;p

becos lens-making is still largely a labor-intensive art which cannot be replaced with automated process lines.

 

[swifty]

Even though APS-C is cheaper, camera manufacturers know that the customers are all heading for FF.

FF cameras are now the new Mid-range APS-C cameras. More and more newbies are jumping into FF.

It makes sense for camera manufacturers to chase FF cameras as that's what the market wants. It makes no sense to give most of the customers who want FF quality what the minority wants: cheaper cameras even though they're just APS-C.

Haha.. not sure I can agree with that but yea, we're all entitled to our opinions.
Maybe I'm alone but I doubt FF is what everyone wants or is heading, even if prices fall to current consumer levels (which would mean cheaper APS-C still). Especially when lenses (price and bulk) and system weight come into the equation.
Although APS-C started as a cost stop-gap in the digital era, its grown into a viable and the biggest digital format. I think investments in APS-C (DX) will remain vital to Nikon's on-going economic health.

Just relating back to the Df concept. At least before this camera, the line up was very much bigger/bulkier = higher end. For those that wanted smaller meant putting up with poorer build, menu-hidden controls etc. The Df bucks this trend and I think that's a good thing.

 

[kei1309]

Haha.. not sure I can agree with that but yea, we're all entitled to our opinions.
Maybe I'm alone but I doubt FF is what everyone wants or is heading, even if prices fall to current consumer levels (which would mean cheaper APS-C still). Especially when lenses (price and bulk) and system weight come into the equation.
Although APS-C started as a cost stop-gap in the digital era, its grown into a viable and the biggest digital format. I think investments in APS-C (DX) will remain vital to Nikon's on-going economic health.

Just relating back to the Df concept. At least before this camera, the line up was very much bigger/bulkier = higher end. For those that wanted smaller meant putting up with poorer build, menu-hidden controls etc. The Df bucks this trend and I think that's a good thing.

Haha true.

Like i said, APS-C will remain. But looking at the numbers of the 5D3 and D800/D800E growing i suppose it's a clear indicator of the trends.

Plus mirrorless systems like the OM-D and A7 systems are offering a higher degree of control even with scaled-down bodies.

If these companies can do it, I'm sure Nikon and Canon can achieve it as well; it just depends on their R&D

 

[ageha]

Nobody wanted to have APS SLRs and I think once 135 DSLRs will be offered as entry level models the same will happen for the same reason. APS-C isn't really a complete system coz it still relies on some full-frame lenses not available as smaller APS-C options anyway.

 

[swifty]

For those who are interested, some Df samples. But jpegs only though.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23743160@N00/sets/72157637727725524/

 

[Ansel]

I have used quite a few Ai or Ai converted lenses on my D800 and they stand up to scrutiny very well, just as LM said. I know of at least one person who swears by the old 5cm f/2 Nikkor-S (not H) 9 blade version, I have the 7-blade version but not converted to Ai, so can't test on FX yet. He also swears by the Nikkor-O 35mm f/2.

So far I have tested E75-150, Ai80-200/4, AiS80-200/4, K24/2.8, Ai50/2 on the D800 and I am pleased with the results.

I have used the 5cm f/2 Nikkor-S, 10.5cm f/2.5 Nikkor-P, 50mm f/1.4 Nikkor-S and 105mm f/2.5 Nikkor-P.C. only on DX. So have to wait and see how they perform on Df.

I believe the old glasses are all good.

Oh, interesting. My experience has been quite the opposite, that MOST, not ALL, of the older lenses don't perform as well as the new ones, on the D700. Perhaps I'm a pixel peeper, or have not used the right lenses. I'll test them again.

 

[ageha]

Oh, interesting. My experience has been quite the opposite, that MOST, not ALL, of the older lenses don't perform as well as the new ones, on the D700. Perhaps I'm a pixel peeper, or have not used the right lenses. I'll test them again.

You're right. Most vintage lenses are totally overrated and show more artefacts than I like. I rather stick to modern glass.

 

[photo-orama]

My experience so far with AI/AI-s lenses: 28mm f/2.0, 35mm f/2.0, 50mm f/1.4, 55m f/2.8 Micro, 105mm f/4 Micro, 105mm f/2.5, 105mm f/1.8, 180mm f/2.8

I am able to test before I buy (it pays when buying from a single vendor) and there are lenses which are way way overrated (some are even deadly expensive but people buy them.. what can you do??). The above lenses I have kept, not because they are super super sharp etc (the nano-coating isn't just a marketing gimmick, it really does have an impact).. but because I like their rendering of the image. If one looks for super sharp, probably (for me at least) only the 105mm f/1.8 will hold its own against the modern glass. But the old glass has a different feel/rendering which I like

Oh, interesting. My experience has been quite the opposite, that MOST, not ALL, of the older lenses don't perform as well as the new ones, on the D700. Perhaps I'm a pixel peeper, or have not used the right lenses. I'll test them again.