D800 or DF?

[PhotoWrangler]

Ah.... well then, all the better.

 

[jaomul]

Well ... if I had to buy a Nikon FX DSLR *now*, I would consider the Df.

The Df leaves a whole lot of stuff out that just isnt needed, and comes with useable ISO 100k (and ISO 200k, but thats more decorative than for real), which, for my kind of photography, would be quite amazing to have.

Still, other than the sensor, its mostly the technology of the D600, and the price is quite steep and hard to justify.

Plus I wear glasses and it seems that the D600 has the best viewfinder for this special condition.

From all of the photos I've seen, there is no horizontal command dial on the front like all the other Nikons.

There is a command dial on the front, its just not horizontal. Instead you move it the way you would move the aperture of old lenses.

[...] Internet says they are close but I am sure the sensor in nikons flagship must have some performance benefit. [...]

No.

Both the D800 and the D4 are cameras for professionals.

The D800 is the studio/landscape camera and has a Sony sensor that simply offers a ***load of resolution with no big issues in other respects.

The D4 is the reportage camera and comes with a sensor that is from Nikon and is made to still operate well even in the worst of condtions.

I was specifically just talking about the sensor here, not the machine it is enclosed in

 

[Solarflare]

I was specifically just talking about the sensor here, not the machine it is enclosed in

So did I.

 

[daggah]

The price will certainly fall quickly, like the D600 did. Give it time for Nikon to make a realistic analysis of their market.

D600 announcement price: $2,099, body only
D600 price now, with the D610 out: $1,999, body only

There have been the occasional sales, yes, but I don't understand why people keep saying that the Df will quickly become cheaper than it is now, when Nikon doesn't have a history of really reducing their prices until the model is replaced by a newer variant. Even the D800 has only dropped a couple hundred bucks. The Df isn't a couple hundred dollars overpriced, it should've been a good solid $1,000 cheaper than it is.

 

[gsgary]

If you want to look cool get DF

Sent from my GT-I9100P using Tapatalk 2

 

[Bulb]

I would buy the D800, hands down.

The DF seems like a gimmick meant to appeal to nostalgia.

 

[robbins.photo]

I find I shoot fairly wide open often where my shutter speeds are close to 1/8000 at times. Yes the DF can operate at artificially reduced ISO 50 but I really prefer a body that offers a full range. That said the sensor on the DF is intriguing. What am I giving up there?

Well if you'll use the faster shutter speed but don't really need the ISO boost quite so much, then sounds like the D800 would be a better choice overall. Just a quick look over at DXOMark and it appears that the D800 sensor is actually superior in most regards:

Nikon D800 Sensor performance - DxOMark

 

[412 Burgh]

My vote is for the D800 based upon your needs and other's statements. Worst comes to worse you ship the D800 to me and I'll take care of it for you.

 

[amolitor]

I find it interesting that immensely high resolution is seen as a good thing for portraiture.

 

[robbins.photo]

I find it interesting that immensely high resolution is seen as a good thing for portraiture.

Where was that stated? I must have missed it.

 

[amolitor]

I find it interesting that immensely high resolution is seen as a good thing for portraiture.

Where was that stated? I must have missed it.

Here and there. Some guy said this:

But really of the 2 cameras I think I would probably go for the D800 myself, especially for portraits. The image resolution on the D800 is amazing from what I've read.

for instance.

 

[robbins.photo]

I find it interesting that immensely high resolution is seen as a good thing for portraiture.

Where was that stated? I must have missed it.

Here and there. Some guy said this:

But really of the 2 cameras I think I would probably go for the D800 myself, especially for portraits. The image resolution on the D800 is amazing from what I've read.

for instance.

I would go for the D800 for portraits, and yes the image resolution is amazing. Doesn't necessarily mean that high image resolution is a good thing for all portrait work. For some, yes.. but for all? Not necessarily.

 

[gsgary]

I would go with the DF, D800 is ugly

 

[Derrel]

I'd venture to post a picture and ask where, but we all know how well that works out.

From all of the photos I've seen, there is no horizontal command dial on the front like all the other Nikons.

You're right--the front command dial on the Df is oriented vertically and is the knurled-edged dial located just inside (toward the lens) the name "Df" and right below the shutter release button. That is the camera's front command dial, and I am going to guess that moving the dial "in" or "out" follows the the aperture ring input effect of Nikkor lenses. As Bjorn noted, the Df's front command dial moves very smoothly and without a lot of force needed, and it has a very "quality" feel to its operation and build.

I have not used every single camera, but when I was last in the market for a camera, I looked at the Canon 5D Mark III, the Nikon D4, the Nikon D800,and the Nikon D700, and the Nikon D3s and D3x. Ever since the 1980's, the MAIN thing I look for in a camera is how well I can SEE all four corners of the frame when wearing eyeglasses, and also, how good the viewfinder image quality is. That's the main reason I shot the Nikon F3HP (aka the F3 High-eyepoint model,with the special optimized-for-eyeglasses pentaprism, not the cheaper, 'stock' finder). The small-body Nikons FM-FE-FE-2-FM-2 I also owned at various times, but I found that the inability to actually just look through the camera and literally SEE all four image corners was a huge liability. When shooting portraits, the need to move my eye around the see the corners of the frame made hand-held framing a regal PITA, especially when shooting with tight framing. The small Nikons also has 97% viewfinders, not the 100% accurate finder of the F3HP. For "people work", for me, the advantages of a BIG, CLEAR finder that is allows me to SEE the entire framing area easily, always, trumps almost everything else. That is why I rejected the Nikon D700 and D800...their viewfinders are not as good as I am used to from the F3HP, the D1, D1h, or my D2x.


The D700 had the worst viewfinder image and worst eyepoint. The D800 was next. The 5D-III was decent. The D4 was excellent, but I didn't like the body feel as well as that of the 5D-III. The D3s and D3x both had the body feel and ergos AND a superb viewfinder image, and good eyepoint. I suspect the reason the D800 viewfinder is not as good as some of the other high-end cameras is because they had to make some design compromises due to the built-in flash unit, and they had to make a more-compact pentaprism. And as Bjorn said of the Df, it DEFINITELY is NOT the same viewfinder as is in the D4, or the D800. He stated that the Df viewfinder system performs very well for focusing manual focus lenses like the 55/1.2 Noct-Nikkor and 35mm f/1.4 manual focus lenses he brought to the launch of the Df for the Nordic region. ALthough the "specs" state the viewfinder screen is a standard model, Bjorn was able to shoot good keeper rate in manual focus with the Noct...which he cannot do with other Nikons. He feels that the viewfinder system has been subtly tuned for better manual focus discernment on the Df.

I dunno...I'm familiar with the kinds of pics Bill shoots. I think viewfinder image quality, and usability, are high priorities in a camera that's used mostly hand-held and on people, and where framing precisely is a big deal. But that's just me. Also, fit, feel, familiarity are issues some people would have. If you do not "like" a camera, it's not the right camera.

 

[robbins.photo]

I'd venture to post a picture and ask where, but we all know how well that works out.

From all of the photos I've seen, there is no horizontal command dial on the front like all the other Nikons.

You're right--the front command dial on the Df is oriented vertically and is the knurled-edged dial located just inside (toward the lens) the name "Df" and right below the shutter release button. That is the camera's front command dial, and I am going to guess that moving the dial "in" or "out" follows the the aperture ring input effect of Nikkor lenses. As Bjorn noted, the Df's front command dial moves very smoothly and without a lot of force needed, and it has a very "quality" feel to its operation and build.

I have not used every single camera, but when I was last in the market for a camera, I looked at the Canon 5D Mark III, the Nikon D4, the Nikon D800,and the Nikon D700, and the Nikon D3s and D3x. Ever since the 1980's, the MAIN thing I look for in a camera is how well I can SEE all four corners of the frame when wearing eyeglasses, and also, how good the viewfinder image quality is. That's the main reason I shot the Nikon F3HP (aka the F3 High-eyepoint model,with the special optimized-for-eyeglasses pentaprism, not the cheaper, 'stock' finder). The small-body Nikons FM-FE-FE-2-FM-2 I also owned at various times, but I found that the inability to actually just look through the camera and literally SEE all four image corners was a huge liability. When shooting portraits, the need to move my eye around the see the corners of the frame made hand-held framing a regal PITA, especially when shooting with tight framing. The small Nikons also has 97% viewfinders, not the 100% accurate finder of the F3HP. For "people work", for me, the advantages of a BIG, CLEAR finder that is allows me to SEE the entire framing area easily, always, trumps almost everything else. That is why I rejected the Nikon D700 and D800...their viewfinders are not as good as I am used to from the F3HP, the D1, D1h, or my D2x.


The D700 had the worst viewfinder image and worst eyepoint. The D800 was next. The 5D-III was decent. The D4 was excellent, but I didn't like the body feel as well as that of the 5D-III. The D3s and D3x both had the body feel and ergos AND a superb viewfinder image, and good eyepoint. I suspect the reason the D800 viewfinder is not as good as some of the other high-end cameras is because they had to make some design compromises due to the built-in flash unit, and they had to make a more-compact pentaprism. And as Bjorn said of the Df, it DEFINITELY is NOT the same viewfinder as is in the D4, or the D800. He stated that the Df viewfinder system performs very well for focusing manual focus lenses like the 55/1.2 Noct-Nikkor and 35mm f/1.4 manual focus lenses he brought to the launch of the Df for the Nordic region. ALthough the "specs" state the viewfinder screen is a standard model, Bjorn was able to shoot good keeper rate in manual focus with the Noct...which he cannot do with other Nikons. He feels that the viewfinder system has been subtly tuned for better manual focus discernment on the Df.

I dunno...I'm familiar with the kinds of pics Bill shoots. I think viewfinder image quality, and usability, are high priorities in a camera that's used mostly hand-held and on people, and where framing precisely is a big deal. But that's just me. Also, fit, feel, familiarity are issues some people would have. If you do not "like" a camera, it's not the right camera.

Wouldn't disagree with you on any particular point Derrel, just that he mentioned the higher shutter speed was important to him. Haven't really worked with the D700/D800 or the DF myself so just basing this off of what I have for information and what he's saying he's particularly interested in when making the recommendation. I think both are very fine cameras and ultimately both would serve well, just which one would be best for his particular needs is really the only issue.