Nikon FF and Pentax

philbaum · 11-29-2013, 02:46 PM

Can you say for sure that you would never do a video. The new publicity director asked me within the last week if i'd be interested in trying a youtube style video for the community theater? I said maybe :-)

Df eliminates the video function with no decrease in price.

Nope, not interested in a nostalgia trip. Give me a camera that focuses on functionality any day (and i'm 65 and should care about film cameras - but i don't)

**Merts** · 11-29-2013, 02:53 PM

Originally posted by MX1

When the K-01 came out I looked at it online and realized the grip would be too small and not deep enough to hang on to the camera without using a full fist grasp.

As for a "retro" viewfinder, I need something due to sight problems. The point and shoot Cannon (SX 200IS) I have is an exercise in faith when I shoot since the only time I can see the display clearly on the back is in low light conditions, otherwise it is point, hope, and shoot. If a viewfinder is needed, why not have it look good, too? Maybe it is a "retro" thing, or perhaps a "retro" styling preference I have. I come from a family of artists so my values are probably skewed.

When using the MX film camera it is easy for me to hold, compose/focus through the view finder and shoot. Not fancy and simplistic in approach, I know, but has worked for over 30 years quite well this way. The Nikon performed well in this manner and would be a real choice if cost of entry wasn't out of reach.

If you are basing your assessment of the ease of holding and using a Pentax digital SLR purely on looking at a K-01 online, that might explain the conclusions you have drawn.

I'm totally confused about your viewfinder comments. All DSLRs have viewfinders (by definition).

RBellavance · 11-29-2013, 03:24 PM

I played with a Df at a local store today, and I am very much underwhelmed. It is the least comfortable camera I have held in a long time. The grip is not deep enough, the shutter button is too far back, and the top dials are clumsy to reach with the camera to your eye (thankfully, there are e-dials in more-or-less the proper place) - especially the exposure compensation one. The locking mechanism on the top-plate dial is not consistent from dial to dial either. And the right-side strap lung is placed where the strap will interfere with the right hand, because of the shutter release location.

IMHO, the Df is *all* about the retro look, and not at all "form following function". The K-7/5/5II's ergonomics (and the K-3's as well I suppose, although I have not handled one yet) are much better, as are those of the other Nikon DSLRs.

johnha · 11-29-2013, 05:53 PM

I understand why some Pentax shooters want an LX-D - but few would justify spending the funds to buy one given the cost of the R&D for a niche product. The UK price for the Df & 50/1.8 is 2,750 UKP (approx. equivalent of 4,000 USD) - eye watering IMHO. For that price you can almost buy a K-3, FA31, DA21 & DA70 - I know which I'd prefer. I like to shoot manual / mechanical cameras with the best of them but not at that kind of price.

The interface of film cameras moved from metal dials to control wheels for good reasons, in my opinion peaking with the Z-1 - which is almost the same as the K-5. An FF version of a K-5 / K-3 would be justifiable for me, but an over-priced, fake retro body (my opinion of the Df) doesn't do it.

MX1 · 11-29-2013, 06:23 PM

I have been convinced, it is my own illusion and now recognize the err of my ways. I will stick with film. Still liked that Nikon!

Quazimoto · 11-30-2013, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by RBellavance

I played with a Df at a local store today, and I am very much underwhelmed. It is the least comfortable camera I have held in a long time. The grip is not deep enough, the shutter button is too far back, and the top dials are clumsy to reach with the camera to your eye (thankfully, there are e-dials in more-or-less the proper place) - especially the exposure compensation one. The locking mechanism on the top-plate dial is not consistent from dial to dial either. And the right-side strap lung is placed where the strap will interfere with the right hand, because of the shutter release location.

IMHO, the Df is *all* about the retro look, and not at all "form following function". The K-7/5/5II's ergonomics (and the K-3's as well I suppose, although I have not handled one yet) are much better, as are those of the other Nikon DSLRs.

Nikons not being consistent or functional?! NEVER! And by "never" I actually mean, that is the Nikon way if life. I use a D3 now (have sold almost all Pentax gear) and while it MAY be worth it for the I.Q., pretty much everytime I change a setting or go to the menu, I wish wish wish and wish harder, that Nikon would stop being so downright STUPID and inconsistent with their functionality. It is just a joke that a $500 Pentax K-x has more useable and convenient AS WELL as MORE FEATURE FILLED menus than a $4000 Nikon D3. I mean it's LAUGHABLE. So the Df? I'm sure it's just a $2700 bit of wank.

tibbitts · 11-30-2013, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by MX1

I have been convinced, it is my own illusion and now recognize the err of my ways. I will stick with film. Still liked that Nikon!

How much have you tried adapting to the current digital pentax cameras? I held out for a long time with my Canon film cameras, until the 6mp cameras became very compelling for me. Overwhelming features for me - not even considering the growing expense of film - was being able to change ISO "mid-roll", and being able to preview images. I always had to bracket with slide film, because just a half-stop or less made a huge difference, so each roll was really more like a dozen or fewer images. I had to carry two 35mm bodies, and even then had only two ISO choices.

There are still reasons some might choose film for some applications, but sticking with it purely for the feel of the body doesn't make sense, unless you've used digital cameras extensively and just can't get used to them. The old film cameras and lenses had an undeniable mechanical appeal that newer ones don't, but you lose so much functionality vs. digital that it would be like sticking to glass plates after roll film became available.

MX1 · 11-30-2013, 10:27 AM

Truthfully the last time I "test drove" a Pentax DSLR was a new K110. Yes, it has been a long while. Who am I kidding? I like the conventional set up of my MX and have shot lots of pics over the years with it. I have grown comfortable with the thing and that is what impressed me about the Nikon. It was familiar.

I am not a pro nor a serious photographer, just a hack that likes to compose pics the way I have always done it. Don't need rapid fire or video or super in camera processing or any of the "features" one is supposed to have. Yes, I do not make any sense to you serious folks, but I do make sense to me. I suppose Pentax must make products at this level that appeal to the pro and semi-pro alike. That ain't me. I am a hack artist.

tibbitts · 12-01-2013, 10:13 AM

You may be the person they designed that nikon for. I'd still say that digital is so superior that if that was the only digital camera I felt comfortable with, it would be worth buying it if I could afford it. You'll likely reclaim the cost in film, or come close. Nikon has maintained at least some degree of lens compatibility over the years (unlike canon), so there should be plenty of old Nikon mount manual lenses floating around that you can use.

K David · 12-02-2013, 05:42 PM

I will tell you what I told Jim Malcolm last February about the FF. If and when it comes out, I want interchangeable viewfinders. I would absolutely drop an extra $500 to have a viewfinder like the F-1 Sportfinder or another $200 for a waist-level finder.

**RobA_Oz** · 12-02-2013, 06:32 PM

Originally posted by K David

I will tell you what I told Jim Malcolm last February about the FF. If and when it comes out, I want interchangeable viewfinders. I would absolutely drop an extra $500 to have a viewfinder like the F-1 Sportfinder or another $200 for a waist-level finder.

I guess it'd be too much of an ask to have viewfinders interchangeable with the LX, but something like that would be good.

Mareket · 12-04-2013, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by First Poster

Truthfully the last time I "test drove" a Pentax DSLR was a new K110. Yes, it has been a long while. Who am I kidding? I like the conventional set up of my MX and have shot lots of pics over the years with it. I have grown comfortable with the thing and that is what impressed me about the Nikon. It was familiar.

I am not a pro nor a serious photographer, just a hack that likes to compose pics the way I have always done it. Don't need rapid fire or video or super in camera processing or any of the "features" one is supposed to have. Yes, I do not make any sense to you serious folks, but I do make sense to me. I suppose Pentax must make products at this level that appeal to the pro and semi-pro alike. That ain't me. I am a hack artist.

I think all that's being said is that you could buy a much cheaper DSLR and get more functionality and a better interface than the Df. But if the sense of having a retro style DSLR is that important to you then go for it, the looks of a camera are a legitimate reason to buy one for some people, and it has a very good sensor in it. My partner has an X100 and the top wheel is nice, but ultimately the dual wheel set-up of most good DSLRs is far superior in every way for me, and lets you ignore the camera.

But a camera is a camera, as long as you enjoy taking photographs then get whatever you enjoy the most.

tuco · 12-04-2013, 03:51 PM

I've also had a chance to use the new DF. If anyone thinks it's a retro camera just because it has a dial interface on top needs to try it. It is hardly retro at all. It can function just like a regular DSLR. It Mostly only looks retro. It doesn't shoot much different than a D800/D7100/D610/etc if you want. You can use both front and rear command dials just like their other DSLRs. And if you own a Nikon DSLR, you'll adapt pretty quick. It even has a "My Menu" to customize commonly used features.

I find the dials on top kind of handy for a "heads up display". You can look down on the camera and see settings at a glance. And in manual mode with auto ISO enabled, those dials are actually quite a nice feature. I think I could really get use to that.

northofpolaris · 12-04-2013, 03:57 PM

I'd say this is a better time than any for Pentax to get into this niche "retro" market while all the hipsters are loving on the vintage film stuff. Put a mustache and a flash that looks like a tophat on it and badabing, landslide of money.

**Merts** · 12-04-2013, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by tuco

I've also had a chance to use the new DF. If anyone thinks it's a retro camera just because it has a dial interface on top needs to try it. It is hardly retro at all. It can function just like a regular DSLR. It Mostly only looks retro.

The definition of 'retro' is a current (modern) thing styled to look like an older one.

People think the DF is retro because it is shaped like on old film SLR, and has controls in similar locations to one. The design is totally about fashion, which is fine, if that's what you are into.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nikon Vs Canon FF - For Pentax users	yusuf	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	4	01-15-2013 02:52 AM
Nikon FF body, Pentax lenses	voyager13	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	21	11-01-2012 02:41 AM
Pentax DA* 16-50mm versus Nikon FF equivalents	mecrox	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	10-22-2012 11:39 AM
Equivalent of Pentax primes on Canon and Nikon FF systems	dexmus	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	2	10-01-2010 11:16 PM
FF Pentax could be like Nikon D3	Denis	Pentax News and Rumors	7	08-01-2008 09:05 PM

11-29-2013, 02:46 PM	#16
philbaum Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA Posts: 3,659	Can you say for sure that you would never do a video. The new publicity director asked me within the last week if i'd be interested in trying a youtube style video for the community theater? I said maybe :-) Df eliminates the video function with no decrease in price. Nope, not interested in a nostalgia trip. Give me a camera that focuses on functionality any day (and i'm 65 and should care about film cameras - but i don't)

11-29-2013, 02:53 PM	#17
Merts Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Bendigo, Victoria, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 132	Originally posted by MX1 When the K-01 came out I looked at it online and realized the grip would be too small and not deep enough to hang on to the camera without using a full fist grasp. As for a "retro" viewfinder, I need something due to sight problems. The point and shoot Cannon (SX 200IS) I have is an exercise in faith when I shoot since the only time I can see the display clearly on the back is in low light conditions, otherwise it is point, hope, and shoot. If a viewfinder is needed, why not have it look good, too? Maybe it is a "retro" thing, or perhaps a "retro" styling preference I have. I come from a family of artists so my values are probably skewed. When using the MX film camera it is easy for me to hold, compose/focus through the view finder and shoot. Not fancy and simplistic in approach, I know, but has worked for over 30 years quite well this way. The Nikon performed well in this manner and would be a real choice if cost of entry wasn't out of reach. If you are basing your assessment of the ease of holding and using a Pentax digital SLR purely on looking at a K-01 online, that might explain the conclusions you have drawn. I'm totally confused about your viewfinder comments. All DSLRs have viewfinders (by definition).

11-29-2013, 03:24 PM	#18
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	I played with a Df at a local store today, and I am very much underwhelmed. It is the least comfortable camera I have held in a long time. The grip is not deep enough, the shutter button is too far back, and the top dials are clumsy to reach with the camera to your eye (thankfully, there are e-dials in more-or-less the proper place) - especially the exposure compensation one. The locking mechanism on the top-plate dial is not consistent from dial to dial either. And the right-side strap lung is placed where the strap will interfere with the right hand, because of the shutter release location. IMHO, the Df is all about the retro look, and not at all "form following function". The K-7/5/5II's ergonomics (and the K-3's as well I suppose, although I have not handled one yet) are much better, as are those of the other Nikon DSLRs.

11-29-2013, 05:53 PM	#19
johnha Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Lancashire, UK Photos: Albums Posts: 1,155	I understand why some Pentax shooters want an LX-D - but few would justify spending the funds to buy one given the cost of the R&D for a niche product. The UK price for the Df & 50/1.8 is 2,750 UKP (approx. equivalent of 4,000 USD) - eye watering IMHO. For that price you can almost buy a K-3, FA31, DA21 & DA70 - I know which I'd prefer. I like to shoot manual / mechanical cameras with the best of them but not at that kind of price. The interface of film cameras moved from metal dials to control wheels for good reasons, in my opinion peaking with the Z-1 - which is almost the same as the K-5. An FF version of a K-5 / K-3 would be justifiable for me, but an over-priced, fake retro body (my opinion of the Df) doesn't do it.

11-29-2013, 06:23 PM	#20
MX1 Guest	I have been convinced, it is my own illusion and now recognize the err of my ways. I will stick with film. Still liked that Nikon!

11-30-2013, 06:27 AM	#21
Quazimoto Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Near Sydney, NSW Photos: Gallery Posts: 331	Originally posted by RBellavance I played with a Df at a local store today, and I am very much underwhelmed. It is the least comfortable camera I have held in a long time. The grip is not deep enough, the shutter button is too far back, and the top dials are clumsy to reach with the camera to your eye (thankfully, there are e-dials in more-or-less the proper place) - especially the exposure compensation one. The locking mechanism on the top-plate dial is not consistent from dial to dial either. And the right-side strap lung is placed where the strap will interfere with the right hand, because of the shutter release location. IMHO, the Df is all about the retro look, and not at all "form following function". The K-7/5/5II's ergonomics (and the K-3's as well I suppose, although I have not handled one yet) are much better, as are those of the other Nikon DSLRs. Nikons not being consistent or functional?! NEVER! And by "never" I actually mean, that is the Nikon way if life. I use a D3 now (have sold almost all Pentax gear) and while it MAY be worth it for the I.Q., pretty much everytime I change a setting or go to the menu, I wish wish wish and wish harder, that Nikon would stop being so downright STUPID and inconsistent with their functionality. It is just a joke that a $500 Pentax K-x has more useable and convenient AS WELL as MORE FEATURE FILLED menus than a $4000 Nikon D3. I mean it's LAUGHABLE. So the Df? I'm sure it's just a $2700 bit of wank.

11-30-2013, 09:49 AM	#22
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,193	Originally posted by MX1 I have been convinced, it is my own illusion and now recognize the err of my ways. I will stick with film. Still liked that Nikon! How much have you tried adapting to the current digital pentax cameras? I held out for a long time with my Canon film cameras, until the 6mp cameras became very compelling for me. Overwhelming features for me - not even considering the growing expense of film - was being able to change ISO "mid-roll", and being able to preview images. I always had to bracket with slide film, because just a half-stop or less made a huge difference, so each roll was really more like a dozen or fewer images. I had to carry two 35mm bodies, and even then had only two ISO choices. There are still reasons some might choose film for some applications, but sticking with it purely for the feel of the body doesn't make sense, unless you've used digital cameras extensively and just can't get used to them. The old film cameras and lenses had an undeniable mechanical appeal that newer ones don't, but you lose so much functionality vs. digital that it would be like sticking to glass plates after roll film became available.

11-30-2013, 10:27 AM	#23
MX1 Guest	Truthfully the last time I "test drove" a Pentax DSLR was a new K110. Yes, it has been a long while. Who am I kidding? I like the conventional set up of my MX and have shot lots of pics over the years with it. I have grown comfortable with the thing and that is what impressed me about the Nikon. It was familiar. I am not a pro nor a serious photographer, just a hack that likes to compose pics the way I have always done it. Don't need rapid fire or video or super in camera processing or any of the "features" one is supposed to have. Yes, I do not make any sense to you serious folks, but I do make sense to me. I suppose Pentax must make products at this level that appeal to the pro and semi-pro alike. That ain't me. I am a hack artist.

12-01-2013, 10:13 AM	#24
tibbitts Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Oklahoma USA Posts: 2,193	You may be the person they designed that nikon for. I'd still say that digital is so superior that if that was the only digital camera I felt comfortable with, it would be worth buying it if I could afford it. You'll likely reclaim the cost in film, or come close. Nikon has maintained at least some degree of lens compatibility over the years (unlike canon), so there should be plenty of old Nikon mount manual lenses floating around that you can use.

12-02-2013, 05:42 PM	#25
K David Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Colorado Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,437	I will tell you what I told Jim Malcolm last February about the FF. If and when it comes out, I want interchangeable viewfinders. I would absolutely drop an extra $500 to have a viewfinder like the F-1 Sportfinder or another $200 for a waist-level finder.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-02-2013, 06:32 PM	#26
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,195	Originally posted by K David I will tell you what I told Jim Malcolm last February about the FF. If and when it comes out, I want interchangeable viewfinders. I would absolutely drop an extra $500 to have a viewfinder like the F-1 Sportfinder or another $200 for a waist-level finder. I guess it'd be too much of an ask to have viewfinders interchangeable with the LX, but something like that would be good.

12-04-2013, 03:22 PM	#27
Mareket Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Chester Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 719	Originally posted by First Poster Truthfully the last time I "test drove" a Pentax DSLR was a new K110. Yes, it has been a long while. Who am I kidding? I like the conventional set up of my MX and have shot lots of pics over the years with it. I have grown comfortable with the thing and that is what impressed me about the Nikon. It was familiar. I am not a pro nor a serious photographer, just a hack that likes to compose pics the way I have always done it. Don't need rapid fire or video or super in camera processing or any of the "features" one is supposed to have. Yes, I do not make any sense to you serious folks, but I do make sense to me. I suppose Pentax must make products at this level that appeal to the pro and semi-pro alike. That ain't me. I am a hack artist. I think all that's being said is that you could buy a much cheaper DSLR and get more functionality and a better interface than the Df. But if the sense of having a retro style DSLR is that important to you then go for it, the looks of a camera are a legitimate reason to buy one for some people, and it has a very good sensor in it. My partner has an X100 and the top wheel is nice, but ultimately the dual wheel set-up of most good DSLRs is far superior in every way for me, and lets you ignore the camera. But a camera is a camera, as long as you enjoy taking photographs then get whatever you enjoy the most.

12-04-2013, 03:51 PM	#28
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,024	I've also had a chance to use the new DF. If anyone thinks it's a retro camera just because it has a dial interface on top needs to try it. It is hardly retro at all. It can function just like a regular DSLR. It Mostly only looks retro. It doesn't shoot much different than a D800/D7100/D610/etc if you want. You can use both front and rear command dials just like their other DSLRs. And if you own a Nikon DSLR, you'll adapt pretty quick. It even has a "My Menu" to customize commonly used features. I find the dials on top kind of handy for a "heads up display". You can look down on the camera and see settings at a glance. And in manual mode with auto ISO enabled, those dials are actually quite a nice feature. I think I could really get use to that.

12-04-2013, 03:57 PM	#29
northofpolaris Senior Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Diamond Bar, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 193	I'd say this is a better time than any for Pentax to get into this niche "retro" market while all the hipsters are loving on the vintage film stuff. Put a mustache and a flash that looks like a tophat on it and badabing, landslide of money.

12-04-2013, 07:51 PM	#30
Merts Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Bendigo, Victoria, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 132	Originally posted by tuco I've also had a chance to use the new DF. If anyone thinks it's a retro camera just because it has a dial interface on top needs to try it. It is hardly retro at all. It can function just like a regular DSLR. It Mostly only looks retro. The definition of 'retro' is a current (modern) thing styled to look like an older one. People think the DF is retro because it is shaped like on old film SLR, and has controls in similar locations to one. The design is totally about fashion, which is fine, if that's what you are into.