Time for a digital LX, Pentax...

**Eric Auer** · 11-05-2013, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by Cambo

Now, if Chevy would only reissue the 69 Chevelle with modern running gear at a decent price...
They'd sell about a billion of them, wouldn't they?
Cheers
Cameron

No, Sorry. They wouldnt.

It looks cool old, Not Cool new.

Look at the New Mustang, Its selling well because its not the old Mustang.

So much more to things than just a look.

I can guarantee the Sony A7/r will completely outsell this Nikon.

**c.a.m** · 11-05-2013, 01:33 PM

Using a 'retro look' as a primary design driver, it remains to be seen whether the Df's form has followed function well. SLR cameras followed a similar basic physical design and layout for good reasons - dSLRs may not necessarily benefit from a similar concept or form.

For example, the smaller of the two displays seems like an afterthought - it's tiny for the three or four parameters it needs to show. The front view - which I like - reflects the lines of a traditional film Nikon, but the other views (top and rear) are an odd mix - not fully retro, not fully modern. As another example - shutter speed and ISO values are selected by physical analog dials but aperture is selected through a thumbwheel and display.

Has it become unnecessarily complicated with this mix of analog controls (buttons, dials) and digital controls and displays?

- Craig

**RobA_Oz** · 11-05-2013, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by konraDarnok

Amen. Show me something new! Not angst ridden nostalgia for generation I can not relate -- no matter how much disposable income they have to relive their youth.

Once again, I don't believe the Df is being marketed at older people, and one look at the videos should reveal which age-group it's really intended for. If we do get an LX-D, I would hope that the spirit of the LX is what it carries: elegance, functionality and robust versatility, rather than the triumph of style over substance.

Alizarine · 11-05-2013, 10:44 PM

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

Once again, I don't believe the Df is being marketed at older people, and one look at the videos should reveal which age-group it's really intended for.

The age group which likes to wander into countrysides on foot?

just kiddin'

feishui · 11-05-2013, 11:26 PM

pentex doesn't have in-lens stable system, so in-camera stable system is a must. However to move a full-frame sensor around is not a small deal. It has never been tested by the market and it could be super expensive, and can make the camera very thick, heavy, and vulnerable, and there won't be any profit. So why would pentax bother to make such a full frame camera?

Alizarine · 11-06-2013, 12:00 AM

Originally posted by feishui

pentex doesn't have in-lens stable system, so in-camera stable system is a must. However to move a full-frame sensor around is not a small deal. It has never been tested by the market and it could be super expensive, and can make the camera very thick, heavy, and vulnerable, and there won't be any profit. So why would pentax bother to make such a full frame camera?

The Sony A99, while it's a monstrous beast of a camera in the hands, certainly has in-body stabilization.

drypenn · 11-06-2013, 01:02 AM

Just by looking at it, the K-01's ergonomics will trump this Nikon monster. Yes, the K-01 is odd-shaped, but it's pocketable, and once held, it's surprisingly hefty, but not to the point of being uncomfortable, and the grip is quite good.

This one is obviously huge and heavy. They should have removed the PASM dial and transferred all the dials in the left side, so it can be used without taking your left hand off the lens. The wheels also took something away from the retro element.

The $3000 tag price seems ridiculous as well. Ridiculous, because if one really wants to burn a lot of cash, look retro, and all, I'll settle for an M9 for a few hundred dollars more, and I'll get the magical red dot to boot!

Cynog Ap Brychan · 11-06-2013, 02:29 AM

Originally posted by drypenn

This one is obviously huge and heavy.

At 765g it's lighter than the K-3. Looks bigger, though.

Sandy Hancock · 11-06-2013, 02:40 AM

Originally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan

At 765g it's lighter than the K-3. Looks bigger, though.

That makes me concerned about its build quality.

SyncGuy · 11-06-2013, 02:50 AM

Heh.... At least I think Nikon does something to meet the market's demand in whatever way possible.. When there's a product, there are always mistakes and that means there are always room for improvements.

Unlike we-know-who, always turning a deaf ear to her supporter's requests. But of course, can't totally blame we-know-who... It's her supporter's mistake in choosing the wrong side.. ;P

**beachgardener** · 11-06-2013, 02:54 AM

drypenn · 11-06-2013, 02:58 AM

Originally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan

At 765g it's lighter than the K-3. Looks bigger, though.

Yup, my bad.

Personally, most modern DSLRs (and this is very true to Pentax) has, I believe, almost perfected the ergonomics, which, I think is very critical in this hobby. This Nikon DF will fail miserably, (just by looking at it) when it comes to handling vis-a-vis a K-5, K-3 or even a K-1. The modern DSLRs have certainly evolved and improved by a lot over the years when compared against these "retros". But, again at the initial price of almost $3,000, an additional $800 wouldn't probably hurt a lot for an M9.

(Maybe, just, maybe, if this doesn't sell a lot for Nikon, wait a year, and it will be on a fire sale at (hopefully) $2,000, then it will be a GREAT camera!)

Cynog Ap Brychan · 11-06-2013, 03:18 AM

Originally posted by drypenn

(Maybe, just, maybe, if this doesn't sell a lot for Nikon, wait a year, and it will be on a fire sale at (hopefully) $2,000, then it will be a GREAT camera!)

I'm rather hoping for this myself. On the other hand, Nikon could keep the production volume low and the price high, as befitting a niche product - a bit like the F6. I really like the design, and if this had the functionality of a D800 in that body, or if it was £900 less, I'd be all over it. But then, I am a baby boomer (trans: "old fogey"), so what do I know.

We shall see what we shall see.

TaoMaas · 11-06-2013, 05:31 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I would rather have a modern "Limited" camera, instead of a DSLR with some old style dials on top.

I think that would be a smarter way to go. A camera along the lines of the 20-40 Limited zoom, in terms of design. Modern, but with a nod to the past. The main thing I want out of any retro camera is the linkage to meter at open aperture with my K and M lenses. But as I look at this new Nikon...and I ask myself if I'd rather have it or a K3 plus a lens or two instead, I have to say that I can live with stopped down metering and modern design for the price.

bxf · 11-06-2013, 05:50 AM

Cameras became fat chunky (and ugly, IMHO) by necessity, not because they look better this way. Give me the look of an M9 any day. The slim shape of yesteryear would not accommodate all the electronics required by a digital camera with many modern features.

Don't assume that just because this is the way cameras look during your generation, it is best in all respects.

11-05-2013, 01:34 PM	#18
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Originally posted by konraDarnok Amen. Show me something new! Not angst ridden nostalgia for generation I can not relate -- no matter how much disposable income they have to relive their youth. Once again, I don't believe the Df is being marketed at older people, and one look at the videos should reveal which age-group it's really intended for. If we do get an LX-D, I would hope that the spirit of the LX is what it carries: elegance, functionality and robust versatility, rather than the triumph of style over substance. Last edited by RobA_Oz; 11-05-2013 at 11:05 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Why not make a Pentax LX digital?	chaza01	Pentax DSLR Discussion	74	04-20-2014 02:51 PM
Suggestions for a flash for a K5iis and an LX	Johnyb3000	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	3	05-23-2013 09:55 PM
Been awhile, any good news on Pentax??? LX Digital???	luke0622	Pentax DSLR Discussion	22	04-24-2012 08:48 AM
Help wanted to solve an issue in a digital camera, please. Thanks for your time!	cellsignaling	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	4	12-30-2010 04:09 PM

11-05-2013, 01:19 PM	#16
Eric Auer Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,211	Originally posted by Cambo Now, if Chevy would only reissue the 69 Chevelle with modern running gear at a decent price... They'd sell about a billion of them, wouldn't they? Cheers Cameron No, Sorry. They wouldnt. It looks cool old, Not Cool new. Look at the New Mustang, Its selling well because its not the old Mustang. So much more to things than just a look. I can guarantee the Sony A7/r will completely outsell this Nikon.

11-05-2013, 01:33 PM	#17
c.a.m Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Ottawa, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,189	Using a 'retro look' as a primary design driver, it remains to be seen whether the Df's form has followed function well. SLR cameras followed a similar basic physical design and layout for good reasons - dSLRs may not necessarily benefit from a similar concept or form. For example, the smaller of the two displays seems like an afterthought - it's tiny for the three or four parameters it needs to show. The front view - which I like - reflects the lines of a traditional film Nikon, but the other views (top and rear) are an odd mix - not fully retro, not fully modern. As another example - shutter speed and ISO values are selected by physical analog dials but aperture is selected through a thumbwheel and display. Has it become unnecessarily complicated with this mix of analog controls (buttons, dials) and digital controls and displays? - Craig

11-05-2013, 10:44 PM	#19
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185	Originally posted by RobA_Oz Once again, I don't believe the Df is being marketed at older people, and one look at the videos should reveal which age-group it's really intended for. The age group which likes to wander into countrysides on foot? just kiddin'

11-05-2013, 11:26 PM	#20
feishui Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Houston Posts: 94	pentex doesn't have in-lens stable system, so in-camera stable system is a must. However to move a full-frame sensor around is not a small deal. It has never been tested by the market and it could be super expensive, and can make the camera very thick, heavy, and vulnerable, and there won't be any profit. So why would pentax bother to make such a full frame camera?

11-06-2013, 12:00 AM	#21
Alizarine Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Manila Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,185	Originally posted by feishui pentex doesn't have in-lens stable system, so in-camera stable system is a must. However to move a full-frame sensor around is not a small deal. It has never been tested by the market and it could be super expensive, and can make the camera very thick, heavy, and vulnerable, and there won't be any profit. So why would pentax bother to make such a full frame camera? The Sony A99, while it's a monstrous beast of a camera in the hands, certainly has in-body stabilization.

11-06-2013, 01:02 AM	#22
drypenn Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 963	Just by looking at it, the K-01's ergonomics will trump this Nikon monster. Yes, the K-01 is odd-shaped, but it's pocketable, and once held, it's surprisingly hefty, but not to the point of being uncomfortable, and the grip is quite good. This one is obviously huge and heavy. They should have removed the PASM dial and transferred all the dials in the left side, so it can be used without taking your left hand off the lens. The wheels also took something away from the retro element. The $3000 tag price seems ridiculous as well. Ridiculous, because if one really wants to burn a lot of cash, look retro, and all, I'll settle for an M9 for a few hundred dollars more, and I'll get the magical red dot to boot!

11-06-2013, 02:29 AM	#23
Cynog Ap Brychan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Gloucester Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by drypenn This one is obviously huge and heavy. At 765g it's lighter than the K-3. Looks bigger, though.

11-06-2013, 02:40 AM	#24
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Originally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan At 765g it's lighter than the K-3. Looks bigger, though. That makes me concerned about its build quality.

11-06-2013, 02:50 AM	#25
SyncGuy Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 821	Heh.... At least I think Nikon does something to meet the market's demand in whatever way possible.. When there's a product, there are always mistakes and that means there are always room for improvements. Unlike we-know-who, always turning a deaf ear to her supporter's requests. But of course, can't totally blame we-know-who... It's her supporter's mistake in choosing the wrong side.. ;P

11-06-2013, 02:54 AM	#26
beachgardener Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,842

11-06-2013, 02:58 AM	#27
drypenn Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 963	Originally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan At 765g it's lighter than the K-3. Looks bigger, though. Yup, my bad. Personally, most modern DSLRs (and this is very true to Pentax) has, I believe, almost perfected the ergonomics, which, I think is very critical in this hobby. This Nikon DF will fail miserably, (just by looking at it) when it comes to handling vis-a-vis a K-5, K-3 or even a K-1. The modern DSLRs have certainly evolved and improved by a lot over the years when compared against these "retros". But, again at the initial price of almost $3,000, an additional $800 wouldn't probably hurt a lot for an M9. (Maybe, just, maybe, if this doesn't sell a lot for Nikon, wait a year, and it will be on a fire sale at (hopefully) $2,000, then it will be a GREAT camera!)

11-06-2013, 03:18 AM	#28
Cynog Ap Brychan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Gloucester Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by drypenn (Maybe, just, maybe, if this doesn't sell a lot for Nikon, wait a year, and it will be on a fire sale at (hopefully) $2,000, then it will be a GREAT camera!) I'm rather hoping for this myself. On the other hand, Nikon could keep the production volume low and the price high, as befitting a niche product - a bit like the F6. I really like the design, and if this had the functionality of a D800 in that body, or if it was £900 less, I'd be all over it. But then, I am a baby boomer (trans: "old fogey"), so what do I know. We shall see what we shall see.

11-06-2013, 05:31 AM	#29
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Originally posted by Kunzite I would rather have a modern "Limited" camera, instead of a DSLR with some old style dials on top. I think that would be a smarter way to go. A camera along the lines of the 20-40 Limited zoom, in terms of design. Modern, but with a nod to the past. The main thing I want out of any retro camera is the linkage to meter at open aperture with my K and M lenses. But as I look at this new Nikon...and I ask myself if I'd rather have it or a K3 plus a lens or two instead, I have to say that I can live with stopped down metering and modern design for the price.

11-06-2013, 05:50 AM	#30
bxf Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Lisbon area Posts: 1,660	Cameras became fat chunky (and ugly, IMHO) by necessity, not because they look better this way. Give me the look of an M9 any day. The slim shape of yesteryear would not accommodate all the electronics required by a digital camera with many modern features. Don't assume that just because this is the way cameras look during your generation, it is best in all respects.