Is K-1 successful attempt of Nikon Df philosophy?

i83N · 06-09-2016, 02:23 AM

Nikon Df was marketed as Digital SLR photography at it’s purest with a retro look. It’s good camera no doubt but even in 2016 almost 3k$ with a small 16mpx sensor and shutter speed of only 1/4000 s.
On the other hand K-1 based on same philosophy has retro look small price and no lack advance technologies.

Adam · 06-09-2016, 02:25 AM

Originally posted by i83N

Nikon Df was marketed as Digital SLR photography at it’s purest with a retro look. It’s good camera no doubt but even in 2016 almost 3k$ with a small 16mpx sensor and shutter speed of only 1/4000 s.
On the other hand K-1 based on same philosophy has retro look small price and no lack advance technologies.

I think the K-1 is an entirely different beast. Pentax is using the backwards compatibility as a selling point, but not as the defining aspect of the camera. Not sure there's much of a retro look to it, except for the prism housing perhaps.

Specs-wise the K-1 is without question a really good deal; its fancy features appear to carry no premium compared to the competitors.

i83N · 06-09-2016, 02:37 AM

It’s retro, with a twist, because 1980-1990 is retro too, and all dials on top are retro looking.

pathdoc · 06-09-2016, 03:35 AM - **1 Like**

The Df was retro because the dials controlled everything, right down to fixed shutter speeds; the K-1 has the typical two context-free wheels of a top of the range DSLR (plus the third). They are philosophically completely different beasts. Not to mention the fact that the Df was designed to natively and seamlessly accept every Nikon lens ever.

A Pentax DSLR designed to do the same thing would be a very different beast, and would have the aperture coupling restored - indeed, would probably have some way of mounting and using SMC Taks for open metering. Given that Pentax's latest move has been to do away with even the aperture actuation lever in its lenses, I think any thought of going back to the uncrippled K-mount is dead and buried (but if they would like to prove me wrong, they can be my guest). I just hope they keep the actuation lever in the camera, so it can continue to use legacy glass. To do away with that would be the biggest blow of all.

ETA: I haven't seen the mount face, but it's quite possible that this is a belt-and-braces/safety net approach; if the mechanical aperture block fails on the K-70, you will still be able to work the KAF4 lenses. I wonder what it is the newer cameras have in them in hardware terms which the older ones don't. The K-5 not being included in the list suggests that there's something Ricoh put in the later bodies against likely future developments - in which case they have been playing a very long game and the future of Pentax in their hands is assured (i.e. at least they're not planning to cut and run).

npc · 06-09-2016, 03:38 AM

I don't have a feeling that I am holding a retro camera with K-1 ... yes it is somewhat ugly (compared to k-5) and overloaded with (not that useful) controls - 2 aspects that are similar to Df.
But other than that K1 is pretty much a slightly larger K3 II. Certainly nothing like SF1 for example from that era - the ugliest piece of plastic that I ever owned.

pathdoc · 06-09-2016, 03:59 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by npc

Certainly nothing like SF1 for example from that era - the ugliest piece of plastic that I ever owned.

I will never forget the display case full of Pentax film-AF-era cameras I saw in Vancouver. All of them I had lusted after as a late-teenager, all now available for a pittance... and I couldn't believe that they were all so hideously ugly. Next to them, the Spotmatic ES-II in its own display case was impossibly beautiful, so much so that I almost bought it on a whim.

**RobA_Oz** · 06-09-2016, 04:38 AM

The K-1 is largely a logical extension of the styling on the previous flagship Pentax DSLRs, top mounted dials and all. The pentaprism housing has a touch of the 67, but other than that the K-1 is its own beast. I think we might be reading too much into this.

The Nikon Df was a blatant attempt to sell a bit of respectable nostalgia to an audience who'd never experienced the real thing, in its time. It wasn't a flagship camera. The fact that some people bought it because it reminded them of a camera they'd owned or desired when it was new, was a side benefit, in my opinion. You just had to look at the marketing material to see it wasn't aimed at them.

The K-1 is a flagship camera. It advances the Pentax range. Comparing it with the Nikon Df is an exercise in marginal thinking.

Sandy Hancock · 06-09-2016, 05:12 AM

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

The K-1 is a flagship camera. It advances the Pentax range. Comparing it with the Nikon Df is an exercise in marginal thinking.

^This

I never got the Df (and I like retro, but Fuji does it way better than Nikon). The D750 has some appeal. I'm *very* happy with my K-1.

pathdoc · 06-09-2016, 05:59 AM

The Df was a peripheral fancy that Nikon indulged in, and I wish all those who bought it, shoot it and enjoy it nothing but good. But to borrow/corrupt an astronomical term, it isn't a main-sequence product. The K-1 is main-sequence.

JPT · 06-09-2016, 06:42 AM - **1 Like**

I'm not saying that the K-1 is a similar camera overall or that it is a deliberate attempt to copy, but if you just look at the two side-by-side, the overall shape of the K-1 is more like the Df than any other camera. I think it's the pronounced prism hump and the numerous dials on the top.

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Give me the K-1 any time, over the Df, though.

i83N · 06-09-2016, 06:52 AM

Originally posted by JPT

I'm not saying that the K-1 is a similar camera overall or that it is a deliberate attempt to copy, but if you just look at the two side-by-side, the overall shape of the K-1 is more like the Df than any other camera. I think it's the pronounced prism hump and the numerous dials on the top.

Compare camera dimensions side by side

Give me the K-1 any time, over the Df, though.

My point exactly

Dipsoid · 06-09-2016, 07:04 AM

I think if the K-1 took inspiration from the DF it would have the aperture coupler to be able to meter pre-KA lenses wide opens wide open like the DF does.

i83N · 06-09-2016, 07:12 AM

Originally posted by Dipsoid

I think if the K-1 took inspiration from the DF it would have the aperture coupler to be able to meter pre-KA lenses wide opens wide open like the DF does.

KAF4 shows that Pentax would never retrofit for old lenses new dslr

Ontarian50 · 06-09-2016, 07:56 AM

I actually have a Df (I know, I know, but I do have three Pentaxes to help atone). It took me awhile, but I can say I do get it. It isn't a pretty camera though - unlike the film Nikons it was meant to emulate.

The fact that the Df doesn't do video tells you just about all you need to know about it. I think it's the only current Nikon camera, compact on up, that doesn't have a video mode. It's intended as a photographer's camera, and there's no way the video crowd can weigh in on what it has or hasn't, or does or doesn't. Using one is a nice experience. I currently have an ancient 55mm 1.2 on it that's non-Ai. It mounts and meters wonderfully.

It still isn't as pared down as I'd like it. I don't think it needs shutter priority or program modes, or the dial they're on - but no doubt there's someone out there who can't live without those, but then they're probably better served by another model anyway. I also agree there's too many locking buttons for the dials - but you get used to them eventually and don't give them a second thought.

I haven't had the fortune to play with a K-1 just yet. But I would have to say it's from a different mold than the Df. The K-1 is a full-featured SLR (and yes, we can debate its videography merits). While it might have some "retro" styling, reminding us of greats like the 67, there's no way Pentax was going all "Df" on us.

tuco · 06-09-2016, 08:11 AM

I have a Df too and really it is no different than any regular DSLR. It's all how you want to use it.

In auto ISO mode and aperture/shutter priority you can operate it with the front and rear command dials just like any other DSLR. The dials on top are nice in, say, manual mode + auto ISO where you can set your desired aperture and shutter quickly before you raising the camera up to your eyes letting and the exposure be adjusted with ISO. The dials are just a different interface than buttons and menus. But the menus and buttons are still there if you want them. It's not like a manual film camera at all and I still shoot those.

06-09-2016, 02:23 AM	#1
i83N Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,203	Is K-1 successful attempt of Nikon Df philosophy? Nikon Df was marketed as Digital SLR photography at it’s purest with a retro look. It’s good camera no doubt but even in 2016 almost 3k$ with a small 16mpx sensor and shutter speed of only 1/4000 s. On the other hand K-1 based on same philosophy has retro look small price and no lack advance technologies.

06-09-2016, 02:25 AM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,595	Originally posted by i83N Nikon Df was marketed as Digital SLR photography at it’s purest with a retro look. It’s good camera no doubt but even in 2016 almost 3k$ with a small 16mpx sensor and shutter speed of only 1/4000 s. On the other hand K-1 based on same philosophy has retro look small price and no lack advance technologies. I think the K-1 is an entirely different beast. Pentax is using the backwards compatibility as a selling point, but not as the defining aspect of the camera. Not sure there's much of a retro look to it, except for the prism housing perhaps. Specs-wise the K-1 is without question a really good deal; its fancy features appear to carry no premium compared to the competitors. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Abstract My first successful attempt to light up the moon.	LeDave	Post Your Photos!	3	06-11-2018 04:02 AM
Is K-1 influencing Nikon pricing?	Danaher Dempsey	Pentax Full Frame	23	02-22-2016 10:58 AM
Upgrading from a K-5 + K-01; considering K-3, Nikon Df and Sony a7 (not exclusively)	Codazzle	Pentax DSLR Discussion	8	11-09-2014 03:34 PM
Nikon DF: specs and lots of pics	Adam	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	33	11-16-2013 11:53 AM
Why does it seem like everyone is bashing the Nikon Df?	bwDraco	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	53	11-06-2013 01:25 PM

06-09-2016, 02:37 AM	#3
i83N Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,203 Original Poster	It’s retro, with a twist, because 1980-1990 is retro too, and all dials on top are retro looking.

06-09-2016, 03:35 AM - 1 Like	#4
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	The Df was retro because the dials controlled everything, right down to fixed shutter speeds; the K-1 has the typical two context-free wheels of a top of the range DSLR (plus the third). They are philosophically completely different beasts. Not to mention the fact that the Df was designed to natively and seamlessly accept every Nikon lens ever. A Pentax DSLR designed to do the same thing would be a very different beast, and would have the aperture coupling restored - indeed, would probably have some way of mounting and using SMC Taks for open metering. Given that Pentax's latest move has been to do away with even the aperture actuation lever in its lenses, I think any thought of going back to the uncrippled K-mount is dead and buried (but if they would like to prove me wrong, they can be my guest). I just hope they keep the actuation lever in the camera, so it can continue to use legacy glass. To do away with that would be the biggest blow of all. ETA: I haven't seen the mount face, but it's quite possible that this is a belt-and-braces/safety net approach; if the mechanical aperture block fails on the K-70, you will still be able to work the KAF4 lenses. I wonder what it is the newer cameras have in them in hardware terms which the older ones don't. The K-5 not being included in the list suggests that there's something Ricoh put in the later bodies against likely future developments - in which case they have been playing a very long game and the future of Pentax in their hands is assured (i.e. at least they're not planning to cut and run).

06-09-2016, 03:38 AM	#5
npc Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Posts: 313	I don't have a feeling that I am holding a retro camera with K-1 ... yes it is somewhat ugly (compared to k-5) and overloaded with (not that useful) controls - 2 aspects that are similar to Df. But other than that K1 is pretty much a slightly larger K3 II. Certainly nothing like SF1 for example from that era - the ugliest piece of plastic that I ever owned.

06-09-2016, 03:59 AM - 1 Like	#6
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	Originally posted by npc Certainly nothing like SF1 for example from that era - the ugliest piece of plastic that I ever owned. I will never forget the display case full of Pentax film-AF-era cameras I saw in Vancouver. All of them I had lusted after as a late-teenager, all now available for a pittance... and I couldn't believe that they were all so hideously ugly. Next to them, the Spotmatic ES-II in its own display case was impossibly beautiful, so much so that I almost bought it on a whim.

06-09-2016, 04:38 AM	#7
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	The K-1 is largely a logical extension of the styling on the previous flagship Pentax DSLRs, top mounted dials and all. The pentaprism housing has a touch of the 67, but other than that the K-1 is its own beast. I think we might be reading too much into this. The Nikon Df was a blatant attempt to sell a bit of respectable nostalgia to an audience who'd never experienced the real thing, in its time. It wasn't a flagship camera. The fact that some people bought it because it reminded them of a camera they'd owned or desired when it was new, was a side benefit, in my opinion. You just had to look at the marketing material to see it wasn't aimed at them. The K-1 is a flagship camera. It advances the Pentax range. Comparing it with the Nikon Df is an exercise in marginal thinking.

06-09-2016, 05:12 AM	#8
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	Originally posted by RobA_Oz The K-1 is a flagship camera. It advances the Pentax range. Comparing it with the Nikon Df is an exercise in marginal thinking. ^This I never got the Df (and I like retro, but Fuji does it way better than Nikon). The D750 has some appeal. I'm very happy with my K-1.

06-09-2016, 05:59 AM	#9
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381	The Df was a peripheral fancy that Nikon indulged in, and I wish all those who bought it, shoot it and enjoy it nothing but good. But to borrow/corrupt an astronomical term, it isn't a main-sequence product. The K-1 is main-sequence.

06-09-2016, 06:42 AM - 1 Like	#10
JPT Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Tokyo Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,821	I'm not saying that the K-1 is a similar camera overall or that it is a deliberate attempt to copy, but if you just look at the two side-by-side, the overall shape of the K-1 is more like the Df than any other camera. I think it's the pronounced prism hump and the numerous dials on the top. Compare camera dimensions side by side Give me the K-1 any time, over the Df, though.

06-09-2016, 06:52 AM	#11
i83N Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,203 Original Poster	Originally posted by JPT I'm not saying that the K-1 is a similar camera overall or that it is a deliberate attempt to copy, but if you just look at the two side-by-side, the overall shape of the K-1 is more like the Df than any other camera. I think it's the pronounced prism hump and the numerous dials on the top. Compare camera dimensions side by side Give me the K-1 any time, over the Df, though. My point exactly

06-09-2016, 07:04 AM	#12
Dipsoid Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 241	I think if the K-1 took inspiration from the DF it would have the aperture coupler to be able to meter pre-KA lenses wide opens wide open like the DF does.

06-09-2016, 07:12 AM	#13
i83N Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Lithuania Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,203 Original Poster	Originally posted by Dipsoid I think if the K-1 took inspiration from the DF it would have the aperture coupler to be able to meter pre-KA lenses wide opens wide open like the DF does. KAF4 shows that Pentax would never retrofit for old lenses new dslr

06-09-2016, 07:56 AM	#14
Ontarian50 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2015 Posts: 530	I actually have a Df (I know, I know, but I do have three Pentaxes to help atone). It took me awhile, but I can say I do get it. It isn't a pretty camera though - unlike the film Nikons it was meant to emulate. The fact that the Df doesn't do video tells you just about all you need to know about it. I think it's the only current Nikon camera, compact on up, that doesn't have a video mode. It's intended as a photographer's camera, and there's no way the video crowd can weigh in on what it has or hasn't, or does or doesn't. Using one is a nice experience. I currently have an ancient 55mm 1.2 on it that's non-Ai. It mounts and meters wonderfully. It still isn't as pared down as I'd like it. I don't think it needs shutter priority or program modes, or the dial they're on - but no doubt there's someone out there who can't live without those, but then they're probably better served by another model anyway. I also agree there's too many locking buttons for the dials - but you get used to them eventually and don't give them a second thought. I haven't had the fortune to play with a K-1 just yet. But I would have to say it's from a different mold than the Df. The K-1 is a full-featured SLR (and yes, we can debate its videography merits). While it might have some "retro" styling, reminding us of greats like the 67, there's no way Pentax was going all "Df" on us.

06-09-2016, 08:11 AM	#15
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	I have a Df too and really it is no different than any regular DSLR. It's all how you want to use it. In auto ISO mode and aperture/shutter priority you can operate it with the front and rear command dials just like any other DSLR. The dials on top are nice in, say, manual mode + auto ISO where you can set your desired aperture and shutter quickly before you raising the camera up to your eyes letting and the exposure be adjusted with ISO. The dials are just a different interface than buttons and menus. But the menus and buttons are still there if you want them. It's not like a manual film camera at all and I still shoot those.