Nikon Df. Pure photography vs. a million dials and buttons.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

I still have to Minolta bodies - an SRT 101 and an XD 7 - I can't really imagine getting rid of these, though i don't do 35 mm film anymore since I had my Mamiya Press and now the the Mamiya 7 II. They are just lovely. 

[TMARK]

That too.  I'll wait until I hold one, shoot with it.  The D800 front dial is hard for me to deal with, I like Canon's position better on the 5D2/1ds MUCH better.  That's what I get for buying a D800 after holding it in Best Buy for 20 seconds.

and exactly the opposite - a perceived ergonomic advantage because of that...

[TMARK]

Right on.  Its like American politics. 

No worries; that is not what I meant! I was just alluding to my frustration that so often, a legitimate variety of opinions (such as yours and mine, I like to think) get polluted by extremist nonsense, and people (including me) get lured into reacting to that rather than discussing the stuff that is actually worth discussing.

[LKaven]

The D800 front dial is hard for me to deal with, I like Canon's position better on the 5D2/1ds MUCH better.  That's what I get for buying a D800 after holding it in Best Buy for 20 seconds.

I feel exactly the same way about the D800.  I have fairly large hands, and neither the front dial nor the shutter release fall at a natural position.  The only position I've found reasonable is to get the lower-right corner of the camera straight into my right palm.  But that position also interferes with my tendons a bit.

The F/F2/F3 were very comfortable cameras to shoot with.  I could carry them around with my fingers, or my right hand wrapped around the lens mount.  They were very quick to bring to the eye, flip, focus, trip.

[Rob C]

I feel exactly the same way about the D800.  I have fairly large hands, and neither the front dial nor the shutter release fall at a natural position.  The only position I've found reasonable is to get the lower-right corner of the camera straight into my right palm.  But that position also interferes with my tendons a bit.

The F/F2/F3 were very comfortable cameras to shoot with.  I could carry them around with my fingers, or my right hand wrapped around the lens mount.  They were very quick to bring to the eye, flip, focus, trip.

Absolutely. Hence my disappointment with the new offering, which introduces even more visual 'controls' confusion than ever. But, at least the confusion may be solvable without opening another blasted menu, something that utterly destroys continuity of thought.

Rob C

[MrSmith27]

Hi,

Sigma owns the Foveon and they make it with a crop factor of 1.7, AFAIK. So there is no Foveon in full frame around.

Could you expand on this a bit?

[BJL]

Foveon is now a divison of Sigma, and now makes its X3 sensors somewhat larger than its original "1.7x": the latest models are 23.5x15.7mm , about as in the mainstream DSLRs of Sony, Nikon, etc., but still 1.5x smaller than the traditional 36x24mm film format.

There are other approaches to the X3 idea (now an industry-standardized term for sensors that measure three color signals at each location) that have been explored and patented by several other sensor and camera makers, some of which sound more promissing than the Foveon approach (which relies on the somewhat different rates of absorption by silicon of different wavelengths of light), but none has yet been commercialized AFAIK. I mention this to preempt the claim that X3 is obviously inherently superior, and is just being ignored by all the major camera and sensor makers because of a Sigma/Foveon monopoly. My guess instead is that the X3 approach has not yet offered enough demonstrated practical advantages over the mainstream CFA approach for anyone else to bother adopting it. Maybe the fabrication costs and relatively poor noise levels are the barriers to wider adoption.

[Christoph C. Feldhaim]

Nikon DF - Next generation ....

[Chairman Bill]

Is that the Hasselblad pimped version?

[bcooter]

I believe that many of us are a lot more influenced by the tactile and sound aspects of a human machine interaction than we realize or are willing to admit.

I believe a non insignificant pourcentage of Df buyers will make up their mind after having put their hands on the camera. This isn't a body that sells online well nor should it pre-order in huge numbers (although it seemd to be doing pretty well). This is IMHO an in store play and buy item.

Cheers,
Bernard

I think they will sell very well.  Not to the under $700 crowd, but for the advanced amateur that won't do a leica but wants something unique, they sell.  Also to the older photographer that remembers analog film they'll gain some traction.  

The above seems to be the market Nikons videos are playing to.  

I think the highest sales figures should come from what everyone here calls the hipsters, which to me are the Millenials.  They missed out on film and you can see were they're playing polaroid/instrigram, a few shooting T Richardson Yashicas and are somewhat intrigued with the analog way, though they need digital to post on the various mediums they are addicted to.

For that group it should sell well, except for price.  I think it's $700 too high at the moment, considering the other two new offerings the Sony and the Olympus are at slightly above $2100.

Now if Olympus made a Full Frame om series camera the same size as their film cameras for $2100 (and actually marketed it)  they'd probably outsell both Nikon and Sony, just because it would be more unique than an Nikon or Sony name.

For everyone, the real telling feature of this camera will be the ability to use and focus old Nikon glass.  A 50mm 1.2, 105mm, 35mm manual focus lenses would look great on this camera and bring back a lot of good feelings IF you can manually focus it at a distance.  If not, it's just a toy that will end up on a shelf.

As a working tool, I'd rather use a 5d2, because I like the output of that camera and am used to Canon ergonomics, though I tried and wouldn't buy a 5d3.  Didn't like the file.


IMO

BC


P.S.  It's funny.  Today we were out running errands and I saw one guy, with a Nikon around his neck bouncing on his belly.  I know it's wrong of me, but first thought in my head was "tourist".

Ten minutes later saw another guy, slightly better built, better hair with a leather jacket and a Leica M something and I thought, investment banker or dentist.

But, if I had rounded the corner and seen some cat with two or three black camera bodies around his neck all taped together with gaff I'd think Photojournalists.

So if your buying a Nikon to look cool, just buy some gaffer tape and don't shave.

[TMARK]

And the real PJ has two 5d2s and some zooms in a bag and is using his iPhone for the shot.

I think they will sell very well.  Not to the under $700 crowd, but for the advanced amateur that won't do a leica but wants something unique, they sell.  Also to the older photographer that remembers analog film they'll gain some traction.  

The above seems to be the market Nikons videos are playing to.  

I think the highest sales figures should come from what everyone here calls the hipsters, which to me are the Millenials.  They missed out on film and you can see were they're playing polaroid/instrigram, a few shooting T Richardson Yashicas and are somewhat intrigued with the analog way, though they need digital to post on the various mediums they are addicted to.

For that group it should sell well, except for price.  I think it's $700 too high at the moment, considering the other two new offerings the Sony and the Olympus are at slightly above $2100.

Now if Olympus made a Full Frame om series camera the same size as their film cameras for $2100 (and actually marketed it)  they'd probably outsell both Nikon and Sony, just because it would be more unique than an Nikon or Sony name.

For everyone, the real telling feature of this camera will be the ability to use and focus old Nikon glass.  A 50mm 1.2, 105mm, 35mm manual focus lenses would look great on this camera and bring back a lot of good feelings IF you can manually focus it at a distance.  If not, it's just a toy that will end up on a shelf.

As a working tool, I'd rather use a 5d2, because I like the output of that camera and am used to Canon ergonomics, though I tried and wouldn't buy a 5d3.  Didn't like the file.


IMO

BC


P.S.  It's funny.  Today we were out running errands and I saw one guy, with a Nikon around his neck bouncing on his belly.  I know it's wrong of me, but first thought in my head was "tourist".

Ten minutes later saw another guy, slightly better built, better hair with a leather jacket and a Leica M something and I thought, investment banker or dentist.

But, if I had rounded the corner and seen some cat with two or three black camera bodies around his neck all taped together with gaff I'd think Photojournalists.

So if your buying a Nikon to look cool, just buy some gaffer tape and don't shave.

[MrSmith27]

Foveon is now a divison of Sigma, and now makes its X3 sensors somewhat larger than its original "1.7x": the latest models are 23.5x15.7mm , about as in the mainstream DSLRs of Sony, Nikon, etc., but still 1.5x smaller than the traditional 36x24mm film format.

There are other approaches to the X3 idea (now an industry-standardized term for sensors that measure three color signals at each location) that have been explored and patented by several other sensor and camera makers, some of which sound more promissing than the Foveon approach (which relies on the somewhat different rates of absorption by silicon of different wavelengths of light), but none has yet been commercialized AFAIK. I mention this to preempt the claim that X3 is obviously inherently superior, and is just being ignored by all the major camera and sensor makers because of a Sigma/Foveon monopoly. My guess instead is that the X3 approach has not yet offered enough demonstrated practical advantages over the mainstream CFA approach for anyone else to bother adopting it. Maybe the fabrication costs and relatively poor noise levels are the barriers to wider adoption.

thanks. I think the issue is the noise. i almost always shoot my dp2m at base iso. try explaining that to the mass market.

[MrSmith27]

And the real PJ has two 5d2s and some zooms in a bag and is using his iPhone for the shot.

nope. the real phot journalist was let go.

[TMARK]

Ha!  Too true.

nope. the real phot journalist was let go.

[bcooter]

And the real PJ has two 5d2s and some zooms in a bag and is using his iPhone for the shot.

C'mon guys.  I wan't thinking about ancient times (7 years ago) or before the world wide stealing machine was in full steam (12 years ago), there are still people out there producing news, some of it is really beautiful.

Every few days the wall street journal in their video section runs a slide show of news images around the world and they're usually amazing and I'll just bet those guys are shooting with 5d's and  d2x's and could care less about the geek talk we all get caught up in and bet you a dollar to a donut that they could care less about a cute nikon.

I like those people.

IMO

BC

[TMARK]

Yeah it's true. Look at an NYT and see what AFP is getting out of Syria. Stunning. And yeah, 1ds3s and 5d2s and zooms.

C'mon guys.  I wan't thinking about ancient times (7 years ago) or before the world wide stealing machine was in full steam (12 years ago), there are still people out there producing news, some of it is really beautiful.

Every few days the wall street journal in their video section runs a slide show of news images around the world and they're usually amazing and I'll just bet those guys are shooting with 5d's and  d2x's and could care less about the geek talk we all get caught up in and bet you a dollar to a donut that they could care less about a cute nikon.

I like those people.

IMO

BC

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,


I would also think the Foveon is much more complex to make than Bayer type devices. Making a "full frame" sensor takes stitching, as normal "steppers" cannot expose a full frame sensor in a single exposure.

Best regards
Erik

thanks. I think the issue is the noise. i almost always shoot my dp2m at base iso. try explaining that to the mass market.

[bcooter]

There is all this noise that the DF is for 50 year olds that yearn for the past.  I don't know if I think of it that way, considering if Nikon had come out with this camera as their first or second digtal camera nobody would have said a thing.

Combined with this noise, is the thing about how "smart" phones have replaced the camera, which they have for people that would never carry a camera, but honestly I don't think "smart phones" are that good at anything.  Try to type a detailed e-mail, or really view a movie, or even a video, or for that matter a pretty still. 

Smart phones are ok at a lot of stuff, just not good at any one thing, including photography, but if they we're, let's say the Nokia 40mpx smart phone shot a beautiful file, would anyone serious about making images charge two and go out and shoot a project with them?

To me the only thing Nikon has done with this camera I don't like is removing the video (which didn't hurt anything) and not putting a higher mpx sensor in it given the cost, but the nice thing about it, it's a camera.

IMO

BC

[ErikKaffehr]

Hi,

Smart phones are good about f/8 and being there photography, and that is not a bad thing.

Personally, I like cameras. I happen to have a Sony RX100, a decent picture taker. But for real pictures I prefer a real camera.

Best regards
Erik

There is all this noise that the DF is for 50 year olds that yearn for the past.  I don't know if I think of it that way, considering if Nikon had come out with this camera as their first or second digtal camera nobody would have said a thing.

Combined with this noise, is the thing about how "smart" phones have replaced the camera, which they have for people that would never carry a camera, but honestly I don't think "smart phones" are that good at anything.  Try to type a detailed e-mail, or really view a movie, or even a video, or for that matter a pretty still. 

Smart phones are ok at a lot of stuff, just not good at any one thing, including photography, but if they we're, let's say the Nokia 40mpx smart phone shot a beautiful file, would anyone serious about making images charge two and go out and shoot a project with them?

To me the only thing Nikon has done with this camera I don't like is removing the video (which didn't hurt anything) and not putting a higher mpx sensor in it given the cost, but the nice thing about it, it's a camera.

IMO

BC

[eronald]

Combined with this noise, is the thing about how "smart" phones have replaced the camera, which they have for people that would never carry a camera, but honestly I don't think "smart phones" are that good at anything.  Try to type a detailed e-mail, or really view a movie, or even a video, or for that matter a pretty still.  

Smart phones are ok at a lot of stuff, just not good at any one thing, including photography, but if they we're, let's say the Nokia 40mpx smart phone shot a beautiful file, would anyone serious about making images charge two and go out and shoot a project with them?

IMO

BC

J,

 Smart phones make images which can be instantly sent on in a single gesture. They are a wonderful "photo-sketch" tool, exactly like a pencil sketch compared to an oil painting. Look at the pix I sent in from the Paris photo show, you instantly understand what things look like.

 The big PROBLEM with digital photography is THE COMPUTER. Spooling stuff over to a dedicated machine, wading through it, sharpening, retouching, Adobe products have an interface only a product manager can love. I'd say that if someone put a zoom camera in a Nokia 1020, or in an iPad, or made a phone version of the interchangeable lens Panasonic GM1 or even the Sony RX100, then a bunch of people would go out with an iPad and that phone, and do projects with them - the trendy Paris photo magazines I see in the kiosks now are all Instagram or blurrycam and look like a Lomo was used, not even an iPhone.

 Aside from the fashion magazines and the big news glossies, most of the published pics I see -press or web - could be done with anything, including a $500 30x super-zoom camera which nobody on this forum would even notice in a shop.

 As you know, I have the greatest respect for the tools of the trade, and the craft which people like you bring with them. However, just like most pop songs were once mixed to be heard on a transistor radio, most publications now expect low-fi because that's the trend.

 Last, not least, I have a D4 and an iPhone. The D4 creates a problem anywhere I go. I have had people run after me in central Paris shouting that I was forbidden from photographing their building. I was stopped by security guards from photographing the Louvre pyramid. The iPhone gets me a picture without problems from the rent-a-cops. I worked for many years as a professional journalist, and I often prefer to gather my material without fuss - of course there are cases when you are expected to make a show of photographing - eg. at events, but in the main I'd say that the phone or compact is well accepted and suitable in many cases where the big cam cannot go.

Edmund