# Not Sure if Super Cool or Super Hipster [New Nikon Df]



## Rook (Nov 5, 2013)

Here

Great idea, but £2700 and I'm a bit more inclined toward Canon's "look" (EDIT: of the pictures, not the cameras haha), would love to try one though.

Thoughts? I was expecting something even smaller tbh, a full frame X Pro1 type thing, slightly underwhelmed personally, it's just a fancy looking body with a D4 pixel count and some 'retro' controls.

Why do manufacturers have to make it look 'retro' just to put a traditional set of controls on, by the way? I'd love to have hard shutter dial, aperture ring and ISO/exposure comp controls at my finger tips without carrying around something that makes me look like I'm making a statement. I'm dreaming though clearly haha.


----------



## MaxOfMetal (Nov 5, 2013)

Rook said:


> makes me look like I'm making a statement


 
Yep, those look like cameras.  

I think you're worrying about it a little much, kinda like the guys who think the audience cares about the brand of guitar or amp they use.


----------



## Tommy (Nov 5, 2013)

I was kinda excited about these just because I was looking for a upgrade from my Canon T3i. I was looking for a smaller body full frame. I just wish with all the mechanical dials they put for the necessities they would add a mechanical control for the aperture. It seems strange to me that you have the shutter speed and ISO on a mechanical dial but not aperture. I'd like to set it up when it's not on and having to do aperture only with it on doesn't seem to fit in with the camera.

Then again, using a sensor that's almost 2 years old on a camera that's priced like that seems a little insane too. 

If would've been interesting if they went full "retro" and got rid of everything on the back of the camera. Like no screen and no little buttons but kept all the goodness of a DSLR inside of the camera. I think if they got rid of the screen maybe they could've cut the size down to what a film camera would be. 

And the price, when I first saw it I thought it would have been around the Fujifilm X series. 

I think I'll just wait till I can try one out or find a good review of it. It seems like a good camera but it seems like a lot of money to fit into a "scene" of classic design.


----------



## Rook (Nov 5, 2013)

MaxOfMetal said:


> Yep, those look like cameras.
> 
> I think you're worrying about it a little much, kinda like the guys who think the audience cares about the brand of guitar or amp they use.



Hehe, to the contrary! I don't particularly like the look of it and I wouldn't want to carry something so shouts around with me. I tend to just slam my camera into my face and bang out a few shots before people have time to notice, my colossal 6D is at least _slightly_ stealthy (matte black like a stealth bomber? no?) but I think the subtly of something smaller is lost if it's then a fashionable looking thing like that that is designed to be looked at.

You're right, I'm overthinking it 



Tommy said:


> I was kinda excited about these just because I was looking for a upgrade from my Canon T3i. I was looking for a smaller body full frame. I just wish with all the mechanical dials they put for the necessities they would add a mechanical control for the aperture. It seems strange to me that you have the shutter speed and ISO on a mechanical dial but not aperture. I'd like to set it up when it's not on and having to do aperture only with it on doesn't seem to fit in with the camera.
> 
> Then again, using a sensor that's almost 2 years old on a camera that's priced like that seems a little insane too.
> 
> ...



I agree in a number of ways. Pricewise though, this was never gunna be X money, it's Nikon - a 'Pro' label - who's cheapest full frame is more than the most expensive X and this is a a full frame with extras; the compactness, aesthetic and so on. It was never gunna be less than the RX1 too, as this has the true optical viewfinder and interchangeable lenses where the RX1 has a fixed 35mm and a silly Zeiss add-on that's about as useful as a chocolate teapot and priced to make your hair fall out. The RX1 sells despite the still-laughed-at-by-professionals brand, so one of the big two doing the compact FF _"and more"_ was always going to be painfully pricey.


----------



## ThePhilosopher (Nov 5, 2013)

If I had to guess the dial on the back is for the aperture control, I'm digging this camera (but only if the cost decreases by about a third). One of my favorite parts of the D3 is the fact that there's a physical control for just about everything.


----------



## Philligan (Nov 5, 2013)

I'm not a fan, personally. I've been watching this kinda closely. All those rumours of a fully manual DSLR for <$2k got me excited.  I was hoping for basically a digital version of my AE-1. The all-manual slows me way down, and somehow ends up making taking pictures more fun and relaxing.

This is an entry-level full frame DSLR with vintage looks for the price of a pro full frame DSLR.

If it was basically an X Pro 1 with a full frame sensor (for a price I could close to afford), I probably would have sold the setup I've got to get that. As it is, I'll be voting with my wallet.


----------



## Rook (Nov 5, 2013)

Yessss. All of that.


----------



## Yousef (Nov 5, 2013)

I was really hopping this camera was being released to compete with the Sony A7. Similar features, similar price. What we have with the Nikon DF is less features and an astounding price. 

It looks like Nikon is attempting to compete with Leicas? I don't know. This camera, to me, is just plain stupid. What are they thinking with the price? Sigh.


----------



## Tang (Nov 5, 2013)

Even though it's an older sensor, it's still Nikon's best performer at least in regards to high ISO. That price though.. goddamn.

It's what I like to call a doctor/lawyer camera. It'll take damn good pictures of a doctors vacation in the Swiss Alps.


----------



## Rook (Nov 5, 2013)

Yousef said:


> I was really hopping this camera was being released to compete with the Sony A7. Similar features, similar price. What we have with the Nikon DF is less features and an astounding price.
> 
> It looks like Nikon is attempting to compete with Leicas? I don't know. This camera, to me, is just plain stupid. What are they thinking with the price? Sigh.



Absolutely. Wouldn't be competing with Leica however on account of Leica being rangefinder cameras, more like competing with those exorbitant Hasselblad compacts that are £1000 for the camera plus £4000 for a name an a form factor that the lawyers would buy - looks like a bargain compared to them.

They'll sell, to wealthy enthusiasts though rather than the usual prosumer/enthusiast/semi pro market or even working professionals who could get a 5D3 or D800 for less than that.


----------



## Tommy (Nov 5, 2013)

I didn't follow any of the hype around this camera. I didn't even know it existed until I was bored and decided to check out the Nikon website last night. That's where the whole idea of it being a contender for the Fujifilm X series just based on looks. 

I completely agree that these will sell but more than likely to people that have way too much money on their hands. I'm kinda new to photography but it seems to me that for the price that you could get something way better and you are pretty much buying it for idea of a retro camera.


----------



## Rook (Nov 6, 2013)

I call it an X-contender because it's a manual control camera, personally.


----------



## Winspear (Nov 6, 2013)

Dude, you have _serious _CAS recently


----------



## Rook (Nov 8, 2013)

It's crippling haha.


----------



## Khoi (Nov 9, 2013)

I like the look of it, but for that price, I'd want something more durable and ergonomic, especially for shooting for extended periods of time. I feel like these are geared towards rich kids who use their $3000 just for instagram. But that's me being jealous.


----------

