This Retro Nikon DF They're Talking About

Horoscope Fish

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I can certainly appreciate the classic lines and functional simplicity, but that being said I think it's a lot of money for what strikes me as a big, fat, dose of nostalgia. *It almost seems aimed at those who love their equipment more than their output. Not that I think this camera *won't* deliver the goods but I don't see this as ever being my *actual* go-to camera. I love good equipment but it never ceases to be a means to an end and I'll discard whatever I have, with nary a backward glance, the moment I feel I can have something else that will help me better express myself artistically.











(*suddenly feeling that statement is going to raise some hackles...)
 
F

fotojack

Senior Member
I totally agree, Fish. I think in this case, Nikon is appealing to the nostalgia buffs more than the serious shooter. Here where I live, this thing goes for $3,000. You'd have to have more money than brains to spend that kind of money on what is essentially a "blast from the past" body paired with modern technology. There is nothing miraculous about this camera that would make it worth that kind of money.
 
J

jdeg

^ broke something
Staff member
This is exactly what the car industry did/is doing. Melding old with new.

The same strategy wouldn't work for the cell phone industry though :)
 
B

Brian

Senior Member
So the consensus is that older Nikon glass has nothing to offer?

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php



These three Nikkors pre-date the Nikon F. I like them. What I miss- using some of my favorite optics bought over the last 35 years.
 
C

carguy

Senior Member
fotojack said:
I totally agree, Fish. I think in this case, Nikon is appealing to the nostalgia buffs more than the serious shooter. Here where I live, this thing goes for $3,000. You'd have to have more money than brains to spend that kind of money on what is essentially a "blast from the past" body paired with modern technology. There is nothing miraculous about this camera that would make it worth that kind of money.
Click to expand...

Not more money than brains at all. It's about personal preference :)

Tapp'n on the go
 
B

Brian

Senior Member
I've worked with Digital imagers since they were in the research lab, 1981 for me. What I don't like about it- modern digital equipment is made to be disposable, and a lot of it feels that way. Nothing needs to last longer than 5 years before it is replaced. That's what I miss most about using film cameras on an everyday basis: quality tools that gave quality results, that were a joy to use.
We'll see what this one does, if Nikon got it right or if it is just for show.
I do resent the more money than brains comment.
 
M

Mfrankfort

Senior Member
jdeg said:
This is exactly what the car industry did/is doing. Melding old with new.

The same strategy wouldn't work for the cell phone industry though :)
Click to expand...

Hey, if they could make phones today with the durability of the old Nokia brick phone, that would be nice. You drop an iPhone on the carpet and it cracks. You could throw those old nokia phones at the wall, and the wall would crack.
 
P

piperbarb

Senior Member
Brian said:
So the consensus is that older Nikon glass has nothing to offer?

attachment.php


attachment.php


attachment.php



These three Nikkors pre-date the Nikon F. I like them. What I miss- using some of my favorite optics bought over the last 35 years.
Click to expand...

I don't think most people think that. I have some older Nikon lenses that I use with my D7000. Great glass is great glass. I have a pre-AF 35mm f/1.4 that I have used for years. I love it and it takes great photos.
 
B

Brian

Senior Member
This is the only Nikon DSLR that can take pre-AI glass and use it with the meter, and with aperture preferred automatic. It is the only Full-Frame Digital Nikon that can take pre-AI lenses without causing damage to the AI coupling. It's more than "just" putting in a flip up lever for the AI ring, sounds like some firmware development to implement the uncoupled metering. As far as "just 16MPixels", that's a good match for older lenses. Factory original parts for converting lenses were available years ago, but never for the lenses made before 1967 or so. pacificrimcamera had a supply. Some people will "slice and Dice" the aperture ring, I've just used them with an F2Sb or Nikkormat EL.

As far as "more money than brains", looks like I bought manual focus lenses at a good time. That, and converting lenses to Leica mount paid for a lot of gear. A couple of Zeiss Sonnars converted to Leica mount would pay for this camera. If anybody is interested, can read the procedure here:
http://aperturepriority.co.nz/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Jupiter-3-Contax-to-Leica-Conversion.pdf
 
Last edited:
B

Brian

Senior Member
Horoscope Fish said:
I love good equipment but it never ceases to be a means to an end and I'll discard whatever I have, with nary a backward glance, the moment I feel I can have something else that will help me better express myself artistically.











(*suddenly feeling that statement is going to raise some hackles...)
Click to expand...

Why not just dump Nikon altogether and switch to Canon? With Nikon- you are stuck with a 55 year old mount and meter coupling designed for a clip on Selenium Cell Meter. Everything that followed has been a hack, kludge, and compromise to retain compatibility with lenses that were obsolete when AF was introduced almost 30 years ago. The throat of the F-Mount is too narrow to produce an Autofocus 58/1.2 lens, so Nikon engineers went with an f1.4 instead- for over $1,600. About double what the 58/1.2 Noct-Nikkor sold for when it was in production. Canon figured out how to make a 50/0.95 RF coupled lens- they cut the top off the glass to place the RF coupling , knowing the frame was 24x36- Over 50 years ago. Looking at the back of the Nikkor 55/1.2, some glass could go to make room for the electrodes for an AF lens. Canon made a 50/1 AF lens for their AF mount, they dumped the manual-focus FD lens decades ago. All you gave up was using that legacy glass.
 
B

Brian

Senior Member
Nikon used to make lenses for Canon cameras.

If you've ever picked up a Canon 50/0.95, it is impressive. 72mm front filter.

Canon 50/0.95, wide-open on the Canon 7.
attachment.php

Not bad for a $200 lens.
About twice the weight of a Nikkor 5cm F1.1. Makes the 55/1.2 look small.
I can't remember a Nikon camera getting bashed so badly in the Nikon forums before. The pre-orders for it are very high, some Nikon fans must like it. I'll wait until trying one out with the 55/1.2 and Vivitar 135/2.3 Series 1. I usually keep an E or B screen in my F2, F, and F3HP. The F Photomic "Bullseye" has an F screen in it, huge microprism circle. If those two lenses focus well on it, I'll buy it.
Given what Canon 50/0.95's go for on Ebay, selling my pair of them would pay for the thing. Which means the Df would cost me $400.

added- adjusted for inflation, this camera is comparable in price to that of the 1977 Nikon FM with an MD-11 motor drive. That camera did not have interchangeable screens, had a permanent K-Screen.
 
Last edited:
N

nmccamy

Senior Member
I would not buy the Df, but I love the fact that I could access most of the commonly used options without going through any menus! I wish ALL DSLR cameras had this feature.
 
B

Brian

Senior Member
I'll probably pick up a D800e for work, to replace the D1x. Have the 70~180 Micro-Nikkor-Zoom, 200/4 AF-Micro-Nikkor, 105/2.8 , and 60/2.8- all bought with the pair of D1x's. But for personal use, I'm more interested in vintage glass.


Nick wrote:
"50+ years photography experience (mostly Canon gear)."

You must have started using Canon RF's?

attachment.php


The lens used for the above shot is one of a kind, made from the front section of a Canon 50/1.5, rear section of a Nikkor 5cm F1.4, and Rangefinder coupled for Leica. Both the Nikkor and Canon were based on the Zeiss Sonnar, but "not copies". They have their differences. I did a two-point calibration to get the focal length correct to the Leica standard. Wide-Open on a Leica M8. I have a Nikon L-F adapter, but will be useful for close-up only.
 
Last edited:
Top