Why is so much hatred for DF (vs the great mirrorless 1st version gadgets)?

[sagar]

Just out of curiosity I was looking at past news maker camera launches and I started wondering why only Nikon is getting beaten up for launching a full working proper camera ala DF.

Okay DF may not be looking as cute/sexy as E-P1/X-Pro or as small as A7/R, but if you keep these emotional first impressions aside, I think DF even at its launch price is much better cam than mirror-less counterparts its trying to compete with. I am not comparing it with DSLRS as I think Nikon is trying to compete with mirror-less crowd


Here are some examples I could think of:

Olympus is ground breaking for overpriced E-P1 with no VF, SLOW AF, few lenses and noisy sensor (USP: Smallest, cutest and 2nd mirror-less in market after Panasonic G1)
– Launch Price $999

Well Fuji gets applauded for a quirky Beta product ala X-Pro1/X100 loaded with firmware bugs, sloooow AF and VF w/o diopter adjustment (USP: Dummy RF, EVF/OVF)
– Launch Price - $1500

Sony gets all the love for compact FF ala A7/R with slow AF, shutter vibrations launched with two lenses costing 2-3 times of their DSLR counterparts, with size as big as SLR lenses (USP: Sensor, Sensor, Sensor)
– Launch Price - $1600/2300 with Native lenses $800 (vs $300+ of DSLR) and $999 (vs $100 of DSLR)

Nikon launches a compact and lightest FF DSLR with nice 100% and big OVF, AF probably much better compared to any mirror-less, with industry leading clean Sensor, quality build magnesium body with shutter rated at 150K (?)
- Launch Price $2500

Are we too harsh on Nikon or expecting bit too much from a company which launched a genuine good product (compared to mirrorless category) or its just that "Pure Photography" campaign is at fault?

 

[Jack]

IMHO, the Df got hammered because it's pricepoint 'felt' too high to folks who wanted it.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Yes, somewhat similar to how people felt about the D3x when it came out too, even though historically it was pretty much a price match to Canon's then current bodies.

Btw, I have a lot of respect for Fuji (admittedly as a user) since they continue to add functionality to their cameras and not just obsolete them every few months.

 

[Paratom]

I think on some internet forums and blogs there is a certain hype for mirrorless and EVF cameras.
Even though I also have used and still use mirrorless for some things (at the moment a GM-1 with 2 lenses) I have been surprized how much love the mirrorless cams get and how many people even replace their dslr with a mirrorless camera.
I am not sure though if the "internet crowd" represents the real world. My camera dealer tells me he still sells much more medium size DSLRs than mirrorless cams.
If I was a fan of Nikon color I would buy the DF immediatly.
I also think some DX DSLRs are underrated, I really like the Pentax for example.

 

[bradhusick]

The Df has a great low light sensor in a restyled D610 body. It's priced too high.

I think it got hammered because the marketing campaign promised a return to "pure photography" and we were all hoping for an FM2 with a digital sensor. We got a repackaged D610.

 

[JonPB]

Why is so much hatred...
...if you keep these emotional first impressions aside...
...expecting bit too much...

With hatred being an emotion, and emotions frequently arising from expectations, whether founded or not, I think you've hit the nail on the head. The other cameras you mentioned had a lot of disappointment around them, too, but they started on the other curve of Mr. Cicla's graph.

I think that Nikon's marketing tapped into a well of desire that many photographers in forums feel: the desire to rekindle the passion, excitement, and simple fun they had with photography in their first photo class. For me, that was with a Pentax K1000, a straightforward machine designed to let a controlled amount of light onto the film, but with few other features. I would have loved the Df if it had dropped autofocus in favor of a brighter viewfinder, and if it lost the thickness of the rear LCD and the battery power it requires--with possibly a small monochrome display, where the only chimping possible would be with a histogram. Basically, a late 1970's to early 1980's design with a digital sensor instead of film. Instead, the Df is a fully featured, fully automated stills camera with added knobs. When excitement comes from the idea that the new camera will have a simpler aesthetic, dropping video functionality and adding knobs on top of all the other controls is simply disappointing.

Of course, if they released the camera that I want, very few other people would buy it--which is why there is no Leica R10. Or, if they released the camera with better integration of the knobs, a la Fuji's X series, then the camera's ergonomics would be substantially different from the other Nikon cameras and would turn off a large portion of their existing customers. The camera is designed the only way it can be given the company that makes it, and, given those limitations, it is very well designed.

But the aspirational and mysterious tone of the pre-release ads gave each photographer the opportunity, even the prompt, to design their ideally simplified camera and expect all that and more from the Df. The camera as actually released could not be all of those things, causing disappointment and irrational negativity toward the product. Expectations for the cameras you compare it to were based on the actual hardware released, and in that way the expectations were reined in a bit closer to reality.

Cheers,
Jon

 

[segedi]

I'm willing to take a Df that has disappointed its current owner! Silver or black. I'm not picky.

 

[Jack]

I'm willing to take a Df that has disappointed its current owner! Silver or black. I'm not picky.

Only problem for you is most Df owners aren't disappointed with them!

Full disclosure: I own (a black) one, and I like it for what it is -- a D4 sensor in lightweight body with control layout similar enough to my D800 it doesn't require much thinking to use it. But I also think it is seriously overpriced for what it is. Price should be on the order of $2K for this sensor in a usable lightweight body without all the retro knicks and knobs. But then Nikon should offer the D610 with a central command button that magnifies to 100% review and they don't do that either. If and when they do either or both of the above, I'll probably buy it (or one of each if they do both) and sell my Df.

Of course that assumes they don't release a 54MP D4XS that bins to 16MP with clean ISO 6400 and DX's to 36MP and does 12 FPS at any price :ROTFL:

 

[Godfrey]

People like to complain, and will do so about anything. The most annoying commonly heard bleating to me is "Damn them, they're going to fail because they didn't insert pet nonsensical detail here."

I look at the Df and the sheer number of controls, dials, buttons, etc, seems a bit daunting to me, and it doesn't match the lovely simplicity of the Nikon F3 that I'd like to see in a digital camera. It seems big and clumsy in the photos. But I haven't had the chance to see or try one yet.

G

 

[GrahamWelland]

Don't worry, it's not big and clumsy in the flesh. The sensor makes it.

 

[Steen]

Why is so much hatred for DF (vs the great mirrorless 1st version gadgets) ?

IMHO, the Df got hammered because it's pricepoint 'felt' too high to folks who wanted it.

Exactly, Jack !

Where I live the Df is 24,600 DKK which equals 4,500 USD (incl. 1.8/50mm kit lens). I wouldn't designate that "nonsensical detail".

So there's a reason why it has been in stock from day one. No backorders. No waiting lists. No sales.

If I could get it with European warranty and all at more or less the same price as in the US I would buy it in a heartbeat. Unfortunately that's not the case.

Instead I'll probably just go with a D600 / D610, it can be had at half the price (incl. a 1.8/50mm normal lens just for this price comparison) and with basically the same specifications.

 

[Bob]

I am not disappointed at all.
It is my go-to informal camera.
Frankly I think some of the new flashy objects without proper viewfinders are overpriced for what they are.
-bob

 

[Jack]

Frankly I think some of the new flashy objects without proper viewfinders are overpriced for what they are.
-bob

You sir, are an obvious $#!T disturber :ROTFL:

 

[Jan Brittenson]

Of course that assumes they don't release a 54MP D4XS that bins to 16MP with clean ISO 6400 and DX's to 36MP and does 12 FPS at any price :ROTFL:

Yes please!!! Here Nikon, take my money!!!

 

[Jan Brittenson]

The DF to me is too much money for what it is: a lifestyle accessory. If it did something extraordinary, new, or novel, or technically elevated the state of the art (D800E to me, YMMV) - the price would have been very low. I like toys and fun little gadgets as much as the next person, but... $3000?!

 

[GrahamWelland]

Re: Why is so much hatred for DF (vs the great mirrorless 1st version gadgets) ?

Exactly, Jack !

Where I live the Df is 24,600 DKK which equals 4,500 USD (incl. 1.8/50mm kit lens). I wouldn't designate that "nonsensical detail".

I must admit that at $4500 it's would really almost be in Hasselblad Lunar territory compared to the US pricing. I wouldn't have bought at that price level.

 

[Shashin]

People, unfortunately, like to bash cameras. You should feel lucky you did not want an RX-1.

 

[GrahamWelland]

I love my apparently ridiculously over-priced (so some will tell me) RX-1R :chug:

 

[D&A]

I think there is an element of accuracy and truth in almost all the posts in this thread. Those that own the DF for the most part, love it for what it is. I said it in previous threads, I believe after sales of the Nikon D4 had settled down since its release, they now wanted to offer a scaled down D4 but not make the mistake of simply a smaller body camera that was otherwise identical to a D4 and its feature set at half the price that ultimately would cannibalize D4 sales. They made that mistake once with the D700 virtually halting D3 sales.

On the other hand people have been clamoring for a FM2 like digital SLR. Nikon thought they could accomplish both goals in a single body. Namely a smaller D4 sensor based camera that was quite distinct from a D4 in that it had it's sensor but not its feature set while at the same time coming up with a pseudo retro DSLR. In essence kill two birds with one stone. Alternatively, maybe all they wanted was camera that could compete somewhat with other cameras known to be "street cameras" and instead of investing in a smaller mirror less new mount camera, simply came up with a smaller, lighter DLSR that sort of appeared to be FM2 like, with a manageable 16MP sensor, great for available light in the widest possible conditions.

As many other have said, if it's price offering was closer to $2,000 , I think it would have garnished more accolades.

Dave (D&A)

 

[bensonga]

I might not be as in tune with the photo forum chatter as others are, but "hatred" seems like a pretty strong word and doesn't fit with the reactions I've heard from friends etc. about the Df.

"Disappointed" that it didn't meet their expectations re "pure photography" and with the relatively high price is the reaction that I've been hearing...which mirrors my own thoughts about the Df.

Gary