[ 3 / a / adv / an / asp / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / g / gd / int / jp / k / lit / m / mlp / mu / n / o / out / p / po / sci / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / v / vg / vp / vr / w / wsg / x]

/p/ - Photography

<< back to board
[Delete this thread]

Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)11:15 UTC+1 No.2369755 Report

So, the Nikon Df... what does /p/ think about it? Is it just an overpriced hipster camera or might it actually be fun and take great pictures?
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)11:18 UTC+1 No.2369756 Report

Only you can take great pictures. The camera is nothing.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)12:21 UTC+1 No.2369774 Report

It's both. I'm rather excited to pick one up on craigslist/KEH in a couple years when the price is better. Save the stupid fucking locks on the dials and no split prism, it's everything I wanted out of a nikon digital.
My only hope is that it actually moves product enough to have the prices come down in the first place. I passed on countless FM3As because I figured I could scoop one up cheap later. :|
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)13:02 UTC+1 No.2369781 Report


Anyone who buys this over a D800 needs to get his head checked. The DF has shit ergonomics to match it's shit specs. The sensor is great, but that's all you're getting for that price tag.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)13:11 UTC+1 No.2369782 Report

>Is it just an overpriced hipster camera or might it actually be fun and take great pictures?
I don't see how these are mutually exclusive.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)13:23 UTC+1 No.2369786 Report

>this anon speaks the truth

The only way a person could be more of a faggot is if they buy the Leica T.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)13:23 UTC+1 No.2369787 Report

The idea was nice, but the execution is pretty inept. Neither the styling nor the ergonomics are a successful mix of old and new (it looks like a bloated FA from the front and like a D600 from the rear, it pretty much has two redundant sets of controls, and seriously, a locking ISO/Ev dial? That's dumber that Leica's hatch)

If you want a real retro camera, get a film one.
If you want a competent retro-styled digital camera, get OM-D or one of the Fujis.
If you want a good full frame Nikon, get a D610 or a D800.
If you want to use pre-Ai manual lenses, get an A7.
Ayya 07/23/14(Wed)13:44 UTC+1 No.2369807 Report

If you want to use pre-Ai manual lenses, get an A7.
But the A7 won't do auto stop down meaning if you want to shoot at ƒ/22 you have to focus and compose at ƒ/22 or lose your moment adjusting aperture manually.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)13:54 UTC+1 No.2369813 Report

Or just use them on a nikon. It's pretty trivial to AI a lens that won't safely mount. If you don't want to risk butchering your lens most repair shops will do it for ~20-50$. For lenses that don't have deep enough rings to AI, just use them as-is.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)14:02 UTC+1 No.2369819 Report

>A7 won't do auto stop down meaning if you want to shoot at ƒ/22 you have to focus and compose at ƒ/22
Well, people don't generally buy old manual lenses to shoot them at f/22, and at reasonable apertures the auto-gain in the EVF works just fine.
On the other hand, if you shoot at apertures wider than ~f/2.5, Df won't show you proper DoF in the VF, and the focusing screen is non-interchangeable.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)14:14 UTC+1 No.2369828 Report

Yet again, ayya doesn't know what the fuck (s)he is talking about.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)15:20 UTC+1 No.2369851 Report


kai from digitalrev says it's shite. who the fuck would anybody buy a df over an 800?

Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)15:27 UTC+1 No.2369856 Report

Ayya is female, newnon
How is what she's saying not correct?
Do they make stop down adapters? If not I should get on that, I could make assloads of money making F-E mount adapters
Trim 07/23/14(Wed)15:28 UTC+1 No.2369857 Report

Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)15:41 UTC+1 No.2369865 Report

Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)15:56 UTC+1 No.2369884 Report


hm but the D800 is more expensive than the Df, no?
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)16:16 UTC+1 No.2369894 Report

No, they're almost exactly the same price.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)16:33 UTC+1 No.2369901 Report

$2750 vs $3000 on B&H, hardly a significant difference. You can also find used D800s cheaper than used Dfs, since the former are older.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)16:35 UTC+1 No.2369904 Report


Ok, but wouldn't I wanna get a D810 now?
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)16:41 UTC+1 No.2369906 Report

I don't know what you want to do, dumbass.
you tell me or better yet, don't tell me, tell your blog.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)16:45 UTC+1 No.2369908 Report


Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)17:10 UTC+1 No.2369920 Report

The fact that D810 is coming very soon doesn't mean that D800 is suddenly useless or unavailable.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)17:28 UTC+1 No.2369934 Report


fair point.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)17:33 UTC+1 No.2369935 Report

Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)20:51 UTC+1 No.2370045 Report

It does make new D800's unavailable.
Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)20:55 UTC+1 No.2370050 Report

Anonymous 07/23/14(Wed)22:50 UTC+1 No.2370098 Report

>photographing fast moments
>at f/22
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)03:33 UTC+1 No.2370184 Report

she's framing a non-issue as a deal-breaking problem. this stems from ignorance, as do nearly all of her posts. this is the problem
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)03:41 UTC+1 No.2370189 Report

>overpriced hipster camera
>great pictures?

Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)04:07 UTC+1 No.2370205 Report

I wish they engineered the controls better, if they did I would have bought one.

I dont want to have to use 2 hands to change settings while shooting.

I planed on moving from a d7000 to the DF, but never made the move because other than the sensor I felt as though I was giving up camera.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)04:12 UTC+1 No.2370209 Report

what did you expect when dealing with an angsty teenage girl?
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)04:44 UTC+1 No.2370216 Report

I'd be behind it if the money that would have been spent on getting video to work correctly would have been spent on improving iq or even ergonomics, but instead it went to designers who suck at life.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)04:46 UTC+1 No.2370218 Report

ITT: people who don't understand the magic
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)05:13 UTC+1 No.2370226 Report

no money would need to be spent to get video to work
they probably spent extra money on crippling it compared to every other camera they make
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)05:15 UTC+1 No.2370228 Report

That isn't strictly true, but yeah.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)07:17 UTC+1 No.2370256 Report

>who don't understand the magic

We understand and love the magic. It's just that the Nikon DF has none. It's a clunky brick with shit ergonomics and weak specs, sensor aside.

For people who want magic, they should look into the Fuji series. That was retro magic done right. Great handling, good specs, great aesthetics and gorgeous IQ. Not full frame, but honestly, I'd enjoy using the Fuji x100s daily. Small, functional, fast.

That Nikon is just an ugly, bulky anchor to drag around.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)08:51 UTC+1 No.2370281 Report


TFW my d610's noise handling is on par or worse than my x100s...
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)12:36 UTC+1 No.2370414 Report

>I wish they engineered the controls better, if they did I would have bought one.

That's the whole thing.

The controls of the D7000 and better are pretty much perfect.
Using retro dials will always make things worse, not better.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)18:09 UTC+1 No.2370560 Report

Dials aren't the problem, dials are as fast as they need to be.
Dials with locks is where Nikon shit the bed.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)18:12 UTC+1 No.2370563 Report

I wonder how hard it is to take the locks off the DIY way.
Not that I particularly care, when I can just buy a Panasonic or a Pentax where the locks are done right to begin with.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)18:59 UTC+1 No.2370601 Report

>Dials aren't the problem
Yes they are, becasue of two reasons:
- You have to move your hands around to turn all the different dials.
- They don't make sense in every shooting mode.

Button press + main/secondary dial turn is perfection.
It lets you do so many things without moving your hands.
If they could do this back when cameras were all mechanical they totally would.
Ayya 07/24/14(Thu)20:34 UTC+1 No.2370645 Report

>Deal-breaking problem
No of course it's not, I'm getting a F mount adapter for my nex.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)22:36 UTC+1 No.2370708 Report

Also drives down the prices of used ones.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)23:41 UTC+1 No.2370764 Report

If you want to change the ISO on a D7000 you have to move your hands and use both hands.
Anonymous 07/24/14(Thu)23:55 UTC+1 No.2370784 Report


But it is possible to do with out removing your eye from the view finder.
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)00:03 UTC+1 No.2370792 Report

You can do the same with a DF.
isi 07/25/14(Fri)07:58 UTC+1 No.2371100 Report

so is changing shutter speed and exposure comp dials on, say, a Fuji.

Different does not have to be better or worse, anon. Life is not a video game.
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)08:24 UTC+1 No.2371123 Report


Do you want the performance or do you want the magic? The D610 has no magic, neither does the D800, so you can't compare them to the DF. If you want performance, I agree with you - fuck the DF and get a D610. But no one buys the DF for performance. They buy it for the "magic" - which is to say how it looks, not how it performs. And it doesn't even look good. If you want the good looks (magic) and reasonable performance, Fuji > DF.
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)12:39 UTC+1 No.2371234 Report

The DF performs just fine. It's basically a D4 in a smaller body.

DF > Fuji
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)15:44 UTC+1 No.2371320 Report

Except in price, size, weight, ergonomics, styling...
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)16:16 UTC+1 No.2371338 Report

The placement of the ISO button is Nikon's biggest flaw.

Fortunately the latest firmware update for my D800 now lets me re-program the video record button to become an ISO button.
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)16:25 UTC+1 No.2371347 Report

Poorfag detected

Girl/weak faggot detected

Poser detected
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)16:27 UTC+1 No.2371349 Report

So you buy big heavy unwieldy ugly expensive difficult-to-use things just to prove you can?
Must be /p/
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)17:57 UTC+1 No.2371401 Report

>Difficult to use
But it's not

It's not really heavy though

Your opinion isn't fact
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:00 UTC+1 No.2371405 Report

It's more difficult to use than a camera with its control wheels and buttons under where your fingers naturally lie.

It's heavier than most (of not all) fuji cameras

It is ugly. It is not my opinion, it is the opinion of most of the people who have ever talked about this camera. I've seen "abortion" and "Abomination" more often than "glorious" or "Well designed"

It doesn't look like the retro camera it's trying to be, and it doesn't look like a useful camera either. Ever seen Alien Resurrection?
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:08 UTC+1 No.2371411 Report

>It is ugly. It is not my opinion, it is the opinion of most of the people who have ever talked about this camera.
I guess you are just a sheep then who follows the herd.

>Everyone is saying it's ugly
>I guess it is ugly then
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:24 UTC+1 No.2371423 Report

Are you being serious right now? That logic is so strawman it's very difficult to take seriously...
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:28 UTC+1 No.2371427 Report

Are you being serious? Just because you have seen people claim it is ugly doesn't mean it is ugly.

I have heard people say that it is nicely designed.

Have you even held one? It's not difficult to use and it's not that heavy.

Of course fuji cameras are going to be lighter, they are smaller and have smaller sensors. They aren't even in the same category.

That's like saying my iPhone is better because the controls are right under my fingers and it's much lighter than a hasselblad H5D
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:31 UTC+1 No.2371430 Report

>Just because most people think it's ugly and it's not selling very well at all, and all the controls are on the top of the camera where literally zero of your fingers go doesn't mean it's a bad camera. I like it, so it's good.

Jesus man, from the front, the top plate looks like the fucking Chicago skyline.
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:35 UTC+1 No.2371434 Report

That's your opinion. But you're wrong.
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:39 UTC+1 No.2371444 Report

It's not ugly.
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)18:50 UTC+1 No.2371452 Report

Can an opinion about a subjective matter be wrong? Interesting. How is that determined? Just by virtue of being opposite of your opinion, I would imagine?
Anonymous 07/25/14(Fri)21:29 UTC+1 No.2371611 Report

The camera being ugly or not is subjective, but you are objectively wrong.
All the content on this website comes from 4chan.org. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster. 4chanArchive is not affiliated with 4chan.