Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-19-2013, 06:09 PM   #31
Veteran Member
mrNewt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON, RH
Posts: 2,179
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul MaudDib Quote
Well, removing video doesn't really help still photography at all, they're two completely different things. There's no feature that removing video bought you.
It does...
- less cluttered menus
- no more mic inputs
- no more headphones inputs
- no more dedicated buttons for video
- internal of the camera will be smaller or create more room for other more useful features.

All this could bring the size of cameras down and let add more buttons for photography side. Carrying all that extra stuff that you will never use is completely useless - to me obviously, for those who actually use it is a different story.

11-20-2013, 10:40 AM   #32
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2007
Location: WW community of Pentax users
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,463
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul MaudDib Quote
... eg no video...
That would be one of the arguments to buy this for me
11-20-2013, 11:47 AM   #33
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 9,472
QuoteOriginally posted by mrNewt Quote
It does...
- less cluttered menus
- no more mic inputs
- no more headphones inputs
- no more dedicated buttons for video
- internal of the camera will be smaller or create more room for other more useful features.
And I'd add another bullet point. No users whining and complaining about video missing this or does not do that kind of a thing. If you put video in just to have the video check box checked, chances are it will fall short what everyone seems to want. My mirroless, for example, has video. It has poor controls and features for video. I'd never use it but it has video!
11-20-2013, 01:19 PM   #34
Veteran Member
mrNewt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON, RH
Posts: 2,179
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
And I'd add another bullet point. No users whining and complaining about video missing this or does not do that kind of a thing. If you put video in just to have the video check box checked, chances are it will fall short what everyone seems to want. My mirroless, for example, has video. It has poor controls and features for video. I'd never use it but it has video!
I was actually thinking to add that but then decided to give up on it because I didn't wanted to start a war

11-20-2013, 03:02 PM   #35
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,795
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
I wouldn't say intentionally omitting video is crippling it.
What he said...


Steve
12-07-2013, 12:07 PM   #36
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 750
I know its subjective, but does anybody else find this camera ugly? I mean I used to have film Nikon and that was simple beautiful design, but this isnt it IMHO....
12-08-2013, 04:15 PM   #37
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,026
QuoteOriginally posted by vrrattko Quote
I know its subjective, but does anybody else find this camera ugly? I mean I used to have film Nikon and that was simple beautiful design, but this isnt it IMHO....
FWIW, I handled it in person and thought the same thing as well as "plasticky" and "cheapy". Silver plastic (if you've ever handled Canon's Rebels) seem to always feel plasticky because of it's smoothness. The dials are metal, but that doesn't help the impression.

So anyways, a friend and I both thought the same thing. And two salespeople said the same thing and they would recommend the D800 over it for the same price point because it's really not that small. We all expected something like Fuji's X series (aka something more like an old film Nikon FE or Pentax LX body), not something as big and blocky.

The sensor is amazing though...ISO12800 has zippo noise :-O

I suspect it'll be Nikon's K-01...though not quite as strong opinion inducing

12-08-2013, 10:40 PM   #38
Veteran Member
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,294
This camera is different, but I do wonder whether "personal preference" is getting confused with "good design". One of the complaints I see from online posts is that the build quality is fine, but it doesn't weight enough to be stable and makes it feel "plasticy", so when many lenses are attached, it becomes front heavy. After shooting a K5 that weighs less, isn't something that weighs less than a d800 or d4 be a good thing?

When compared to the D800, you get 1,400 shots vs 900 on a battery; 5.5fps vs 4.0; and better noise control from 400 up. As compared to the D4, I would expect it to fall behind as it's half the price, but many elements are similar since it uses the same sensor (and is half the price).

A retro camera with a D4 sensor is a little cool. Where is the Pentax LXd?
12-18-2013, 09:19 PM   #39
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
rbefly's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Denver, Colorado
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,030
Magnum DF?

Apparently I'm not the only person alive who believes the Df is...how you say? Not beautiful?
Nikon Df: Tom Selleck, Your Camera Has Arrived | New Camera News
Especially liked the part about '500' knobs and switches', "Billingham bag and Jaguar" etc. They pretty much nailed the sales campaign.
But, it's only satire, right?
Ron
12-20-2013, 03:28 PM   #40
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
rbefly's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Denver, Colorado
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,030
Be Careful What You Wish For!

Well, for all those 'Legacy' fans swooning over the Df, you've now got someone else to take issue with; DPR. A new 'Full Review' of the Df.
That's right, those Nikon-friendly (actually, Canikony, you know, all the flashing ads alongside the forum, otherwise known as TWPTB- Those who pay the bills) reviewers who regularly add a point or three if the first initial is C, N or maybe S. Yep, those guys, you were sure they'd have lots of glowing comments you could gleefully post here, right?
Not so fast, retroman!
You won't find many quotes to love here; Instead, words and phrases like 'Disappointing' 'Sadly' 'Too many compromises'
Nikon Df Review: Digital Photography Review
And if you skip to page 17, otherwise know as 'Conclusions' there's lots of paragraphs that start with "The image quality is excellent, but..." or While the high ISO performance is good, we found....". One line calls it a "D610 with a 50% Retro tax" Ouch! You get the idea, lots of caveats and shoulda, coulda's. Most all cameras reviewed get a gold, silver or bronze award, The Df? Nope. Not on the podium this time.
The overall rating is 81%, pretty miserable by Nikon standards, we'd expect maybe a top-line Pentax to receive a slap like that, but one of the 'Real' camera makers? A $2,700 full frame from Nikon? must be a typo.
The list of 'Cons' is much longer than the 'Pros' and twice as cruel. The fanboys are all over this, slinging trashtalk at those very same reviewers they loved and quoted so often in the past. But, Nikon goofed and now it's official, according to the largest camera forum on the planet.
Believe it or not. I read it on the internet, so it must be true.
Ron

Last edited by rbefly; 12-20-2013 at 03:40 PM.
12-21-2013, 10:52 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,026
I actually thought dpreview was being nice. I would have summed it up as "fugly blocky plasticky cheapy retro'ish body w/ great sensor" :-)
12-26-2013, 05:23 PM   #42
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Yorktown, VA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 102
Just discovered the existence of the DF today, thanks to the miracle of targeted marketing--Those ads that show up on the right-hand side of your screen based upon the snooping that's being done on you when you surf.

So, the retro look grabbed me right off because it did indeed remind me of the old Nikons I used to get to borrow from the school newspaper back in college (my own camera being a K1000, of course). I'm probably way behind the times here, but I was surprised when I read about the legacy glass aspect of the DF. I thought Pentax was the ONLY brand that offered that flexibility. Is this a new, new thing for Nikon, or have I missed other possibilities out there?
12-27-2013, 04:48 AM   #43
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2007
Location: WW community of Pentax users
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,463
Starting with Ai (or Ai'ed) lenses, the old Nikkors have been compatible with the higher end Nikons for a long time.
New for the Df is that it also takes pre-Ai lenses.
12-29-2013, 01:42 PM - 1 Like   #44
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Edina, MN
Posts: 258
Well, I ordered a Df with the lens shortly after Thanksgiving. Since then I've bought 3 used Nikon AIS lenses. I'm having a blast with this camera. The low-light capabilities are amazing. So, personally, I don't care if DP Review didn't care for the camera or if people feel it's ugly or plasticky. I think neither is true, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I've found the camera to be easy to focus manually. Oh, the lenses I bought are a 24 2.8, 80 2, and 28-50 3.5. All work well on the camera, and I got each for about $200 per lens. The 24 mm was a demo from Adorama; all three are in excellent shape - look and handle like new. I bought one from Collectible Cameras, one from B&H and as I said, one from Adorama. It's probably just a matter of time before I pop for the 50mm 1.2, but for now the 50mm that came with the camera is fine. I like the old all-metal lenses better than the newer all plastic lenses Nikon seems to only make now. The autofocus on the 50mm 1.8 is much faster than any auto-focus I've used before, which would only be Pentax cameras or older film cameras (F4S, Contax N1.)

We're heading out to Vegas on the 1st for a week, and I'll take the camera and a couple of lenses with. Ethel M's has a cactus garden and for the holidays they wrap the cacti with over 250,000 lights. We've seen it before, and I've taken pictures there before, but I'm really looking forward to doing that with the high ISO capabilities of this camera. That and the Venetian's Winter in Venice festival should provide a chance to put the camera through its paces.

One final thought for now - I probably am that retro guy that Nikon was aiming this camera at. I don't do a lot of action photography, more likely landscape and travel photography. My first digital camera was a Leica M8.2, and I gave that up because the lenses were just too darned expensive for me. Since the Leica it's been Pentax, using the primes and old glass. So I really don't find manual focus a problem; in fact I rather enjoy it, and for much of the photography I do autofocus is of limited value. I like using old glass - and there is A LOT of nice old Nikon glass available at very nice prices.

This is going to be a lot of fun.

Last edited by qblade; 12-29-2013 at 01:53 PM.
12-29-2013, 10:01 PM   #45
Veteran Member
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,519
QuoteOriginally posted by qblade Quote
Well, I ordered a Df with the lens shortly after Thanksgiving. Since then I've bought 3 used Nikon AIS lenses. I'm having a blast with this camera. The low-light capabilities are amazing. So, personally, I don't care if DP Review didn't care for the camera or if people feel it's ugly or plasticky. I think neither is true, but everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I've found the camera to be easy to focus manually. Oh, the lenses I bought are a 24 2.8, 80 2, and 28-50 3.5. All work well on the camera, and I got each for about $200 per lens. The 24 mm was a demo from Adorama; all three are in excellent shape - look and handle like new. I bought one from Collectible Cameras, one from B&H and as I said, one from Adorama. It's probably just a matter of time before I pop for the 50mm 1.2, but for now the 50mm that came with the camera is fine. I like the old all-metal lenses better than the newer all plastic lenses Nikon seems to only make now. The autofocus on the 50mm 1.8 is much faster than any auto-focus I've used before, which would only be Pentax cameras or older film cameras (F4S, Contax N1.)

We're heading out to Vegas on the 1st for a week, and I'll take the camera and a couple of lenses with. Ethel M's has a cactus garden and for the holidays they wrap the cacti with over 250,000 lights. We've seen it before, and I've taken pictures there before, but I'm really looking forward to doing that with the high ISO capabilities of this camera. That and the Venetian's Winter in Venice festival should provide a chance to put the camera through its paces.

One final thought for now - I probably am that retro guy that Nikon was aiming this camera at. I don't do a lot of action photography, more likely landscape and travel photography. My first digital camera was a Leica M8.2, and I gave that up because the lenses were just too darned expensive for me. Since the Leica it's been Pentax, using the primes and old glass. So I really don't find manual focus a problem; in fact I rather enjoy it, and for much of the photography I do autofocus is of limited value. I like using old glass - and there is A LOT of nice old Nikon glass available at very nice prices.

This is going to be a lot of fun.
\
I'll be intrigued to learn more about your experiences with this new camera. I need another camera like I need a flesh eating disease, but... I can't help but be tempted by a D4 sensor for half the price of a D4...
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, design, df, dslr, model, nikon, nikon df, pentax
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon DF: specs and lots of pics Adam Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 33 11-16-2013 11:53 AM
Nikon DF: Size Comparison richard balonglong Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 40 11-07-2013 12:44 AM
Why does it seem like everyone is bashing the Nikon Df? bwDraco Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 53 11-06-2013 01:25 PM
First Nikon Df images up at SteveHuff Samsungian Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 60 11-05-2013 05:44 PM
New Nikon DF Full Frame TaxMan Photographic Industry and Professionals 26 10-29-2013 02:22 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:52 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top