Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Nikon Df. Pure photography vs. a million dials and buttons.  (Read 23402 times)
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8007



WWW
« Reply #180 on: December 10, 2013, 06:08:07 AM »
ReplyReply

The Df appears to be a lame attempt to jump on the retro bandwagon, I was simply very underwhelmed when I came across it, but I wasn't as scathing as the chap who'd pre-odered one. Which was telling as he loved Nikon, had loads of money to burn and wanted something like his old film Nikkons. I have no problem with others preferring Camera A over my Camera B if it suits their needs better. But a cheap looking camera, with irrelevant, wobbly and fiddly to use retro style dials which was advertised as a trés cool lifestyle product with an inflated price to match is a bit rubbish because it misses all the targets it's aiming at.

OK, you are 100% right.

But are these things the only ones you dislike about the Df?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
joneil
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 141


This is what beer does to you....


« Reply #181 on: December 10, 2013, 07:35:28 AM »
ReplyReply

  Looked at one, for the price, wasn't my cup of tea.    At that price range, I would rather go with the D800.

  For my 2 cents  worth, it still boils down to the fact that Nikon still has not brought out a true successor to the D700, which I think they got darned near perfect at the time.  The D800 is slower, the D600 is not as sturdy and lacks some basic features  that the D700 has,  and the Df, well, it lack basics like dual card slots.

   I think Nikon keeps dancing around the D700.  I don't know what their thinking is, but I wonder, in some cases, is the  panning of the Df is related directly or indirectly to the fact that many of us are disappointed in Nikon for not coming out with a simple upgrade to the D700?
Logged
jjj
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3482



WWW
« Reply #182 on: December 10, 2013, 09:15:04 AM »
ReplyReply

OK, you are 100% right.

But are these things the only ones you dislike about the Df?
You mean things apart from the entire basis of the [very good] marketing for it? Not really important as I was commenting on things relevant to how it was being sold. I'm sure it takes as nice a picture as other cameras with the same sensor.

I'm not overly fond of Nikons, too fiddly and faffy and every time I've used one and got stuck on something quite basic, I've asked the expert or other Nikon users and they've been stumped too. Even the guy from Nikon demoing the Df was baffled as to how the camera worked in some areas - which is pretty shocking and not the first time this has happened with Nikon kit.
Mind you, whoever is responsible for the interfaces on Canon flashes wants a good flogging and the reasoning/methodology behind how they work with the camera is also ridiculously arcane. Interestingly I've noticed a couple of die-hard Nikon fans Scott Kelby and Glyn Dewis have recently swapped to Canon, but they also now tend to use studio flashes rather than speedlights. Maybe there's a connection, because if they still used the by all account much better Nikon flashes, maybe they wouldn't have changed brands.
Logged

Tradition is the Backbone of the Spineless.   Futt Futt Futt Photography
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1130


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #183 on: December 10, 2013, 12:33:56 PM »
ReplyReply

Everytime I pass a d800 and think, yea that's a good deal, my brane flips back to  the orange skin tones of the D3, D4 and how much I hate that NX or Nick (or whatever it's called) software.

Then I pass and thank myself for not blowing 3 grand.

IMO

BC
Logged

LKaven
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 819


« Reply #184 on: December 10, 2013, 01:26:36 PM »
ReplyReply

Everytime I pass a d800 and think, yea that's a good deal, my brane flips back to  the orange skin tones of the D3, D4 and how much I hate that NX or Nick (or whatever it's called) software.

Very different sensor technology in the D3, D4, and D800. 

When it comes to NX, hate away.  But CaptureOne does a great job on these files.
Logged

BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 8007



WWW
« Reply #185 on: December 10, 2013, 05:15:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Everytime I pass a d800 and think, yea that's a good deal, my brane flips back to  the orange skin tones of the D3, D4 and how much I hate that NX or Nick (or whatever it's called) software.

Then I pass and thank myself for not blowing 3 grand.

BC,

Are you saying you have never used a D800?

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Rob C
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 12213


« Reply #186 on: December 11, 2013, 10:13:55 AM »
ReplyReply

  Looked at one, for the price, wasn't my cup of tea.    At that price range, I would rather go with the D800.

  For my 2 cents  worth, it still boils down to the fact that Nikon still has not brought out a true successor to the D700, which I think they got darned near perfect at the time.  The D800 is slower, the D600 is not as sturdy and lacks some basic features  that the D700 has,  and the Df, well, it lack basics like dual card slots.

   I think Nikon keeps dancing around the D700.  I don't know what their thinking is, but I wonder, in some cases, is the  panning of the Df is related directly or indirectly to the fact that many of us are disappointed in Nikon for not coming out with a simple upgrade to the D700?



Thank you! As a D700 owner, I feel I have actually made a good digital decision.

;-)

Rob C
Logged

allegretto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #187 on: December 15, 2013, 10:59:45 PM »
ReplyReply

Everytime I pass a d800 and think, yea that's a good deal, my brane flips back to  the orange skin tones of the D3, D4 and how much I hate that NX or Nick (or whatever it's called) software.



1+

This right here is why I switched from Nikon to Canon. Someone at Nikon design thinks skin is firmly in the red/orange/pink family. So is the rest of the World too, I guess. Yes, it can be somewhat cleaned up PP, but the color right OOC in Canons just looks better to my eye. Some may differ, and that's fine for them. Don't want to inflame anyone.

Secondly, I like the Canon glass family better too.

But curiously many seem to be dissing many of the latest cameras not because they are not good, they all are. But as with every design, there are trade-offs and folks can always find something to not like about any camera. We used to carry multiple backs since we needed different film for different situations. Maybe bodies should be looked upon as "backs" and one should carry or own a couple of different ones for varying situations. Bodies/features will come and go, As far as equipment it's about the lenses IMHO anyway.
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2370


« Reply #188 on: December 16, 2013, 04:36:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Everytime I pass a d800 and think, yea that's a good deal, my brane flips back to  the orange skin tones of the D3, D4 and how much I hate that NX or Nick (or whatever it's called) software.

Then I pass and thank myself for not blowing 3 grand.

IMO

BC

I have very much the same, hated the orange skin tones. The d800 was even worse initially when using LR however C1 is doing a really nice job with skin tones! I even got myself a license for C1v7 just for that reason..
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1842


« Reply #189 on: December 16, 2013, 08:40:12 AM »
ReplyReply

I have very much the same, hated the orange skin tones. The d800 was even worse initially when using LR however C1 is doing a really nice job with skin tones! I even got myself a license for C1v7 just for that reason..

It was really bad at first.  easy enough to fix in PS, but what a pain in the ass.  C1 seems best for D800 files.  The NIK software, with a little tweak, can get there too, but its like using DOS compared to C1 and LR.  In LR I would apply DNG neutral and dial in the color.  It was painful compared to an M9 or Fuji file, which looks great OOC.  The only tweek to the M9 color for skin, as opposed to a treatment, is dialing back the reds just a bit.  The hue is correct, just a little over saturated.
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1842


« Reply #190 on: December 16, 2013, 08:43:38 AM »
ReplyReply

I like 5d2 and 1ds3 color the best of any DSLR.  Straight from LR or C1, or DPP.  I sold the bodoes but kept the lenses, waiting for a model with better DR.

I do not like teh look of the Nikon G lenses.  This is just taste, they are good lenses, but they are too modern.  They scream DIGITAL to me.  The 28 1.8G is a sharp, sharp lens but I much prefer teh rendering of the 28 AIS.  It just looks more organic.

1+

This right here is why I switched from Nikon to Canon. Someone at Nikon design thinks skin is firmly in the red/orange/pink family. So is the rest of the World too, I guess. Yes, it can be somewhat cleaned up PP, but the color right OOC in Canons just looks better to my eye. Some may differ, and that's fine for them. Don't want to inflame anyone.

Secondly, I like the Canon glass family better too.

But curiously many seem to be dissing many of the latest cameras not because they are not good, they all are. But as with every design, there are trade-offs and folks can always find something to not like about any camera. We used to carry multiple backs since we needed different film for different situations. Maybe bodies should be looked upon as "backs" and one should carry or own a couple of different ones for varying situations. Bodies/features will come and go, As far as equipment it's about the lenses IMHO anyway.
Logged
Dustbak
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2370


« Reply #191 on: December 16, 2013, 09:40:47 AM »
ReplyReply

Agreed, the G lenses have a rendering that is not always that pleasant. I find the rendition of colors 'thin, fragile or frail' if that makes sense to you. A pleasant surprise seems to be the new 58, don't get it for sharpness but the rendition is definitely very pleasing with 'fat' colors.
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1842


« Reply #192 on: December 16, 2013, 10:18:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Makes perfect sense.  They look thin, like they could be easily scratched or something.  I have older lenses which are much more pleasant for breathing subjects.

Agreed, the G lenses have a rendering that is not always that pleasant. I find the rendition of colors 'thin, fragile or frail' if that makes sense to you.
Logged
allegretto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #193 on: December 16, 2013, 11:19:59 AM »
ReplyReply

I like 5d2 and 1ds3 color the best of any DSLR.  Straight from LR or C1, or DPP.  I sold the bodoes but kept the lenses, waiting for a model with better DR.

I do not like teh look of the Nikon G lenses.  This is just taste, they are good lenses, but they are too modern.  They scream DIGITAL to me.  The 28 1.8G is a sharp, sharp lens but I much prefer teh rendering of the 28 AIS.  It just looks more organic.


Yes, yes.... there are many that seem to proclaim the Nikons are soooo much better with DR. And of course DxO ratings are there to lean on as "proof".

However if you scratch the surface, even the vaunted D800, does have nearly two stops... at ISO 200. Turn the dial and the "superiority" evaporates rather quickly and the D800 has less DR than my 6D (a darn good little bugger!). By ISO 800 the Nikon is sucking wind (sensorgen.info). Sensor efficiency drops (-e) but it does have low read noise (but the 1Dx whups it and the 6D catches up)

Now if you're true pro, your clients are telling you that your work lacks DR, you have the studio or limit your shooting to ISO 200 or less, etc.... then by all means you are right to scratch and claw for every pixel and DR you can find... and go home at night proud of yourself.

Guys like me shoot in all kinds of light, all kinds of subjects, still and fast moving, so I can sometimes use, and do when possible use ISO 200. But often find myself significantly faster. And, even at ISO 200 don't look at the Canon's images and say, "gee I wish I had another stop or two of DR". But that's just me.

Color fidelity, sensor superiority at higher ISO and lens choices more than makes up for the low ISO DR in my World. YMMV, of course...
Logged
TMARK
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1842


« Reply #194 on: December 16, 2013, 11:56:49 AM »
ReplyReply

I base my need for better DR on my own experience as an editorial and commercial photographer, although I don't shoot commercially anymore.  The D800 files are more flexible and have cleaner shadows than any Canon I've used, which is meaningful to me when working the files in post.  Pulling in a blown sky on a D800 file is not an issue.  I can shoot a D800 like I did film or any of the MF backs I owned/rented.  In fact its better than the backs in many respects.

I'm not taking a dump on Canon, I still have the lenses and the color, but in reality the D800 is better for what I shoot/shot than the 5D2/3, 1ds3. 

I've never looked at sensor test data, DXO, etc in my life.  I've owned every full frame Canon, save for the 6D and 1dx.  I've used or owned every full frame Nikon, and the D200 and D2x.  I also owned or rented digi backs from the Valeo22, Sinar 54M, Aptus 75, 54s, 17, P30+ and P25.     


Yes, yes.... there are many that seem to proclaim the Nikons are soooo much better with DR. And of course DxO ratings are there to lean on as "proof".

However if you scratch the surface, even the vaunted D800, does have nearly two stops... at ISO 200. Turn the dial and the "superiority" evaporates rather quickly and the D800 has less DR than my 6D (a darn good little bugger!). By ISO 800 the Nikon is sucking wind (sensorgen.info). Sensor efficiency drops (-e) but it does have low read noise (but the 1Dx whups it and the 6D catches up)

Now if you're true pro, your clients are telling you that your work lacks DR, you have the studio or limit your shooting to ISO 200 or less, etc.... then by all means you are right to scratch and claw for every pixel and DR you can find... and go home at night proud of yourself.

Guys like me shoot in all kinds of light, all kinds of subjects, still and fast moving, so I can sometimes use, and do when possible use ISO 200. But often find myself significantly faster. And, even at ISO 200 don't look at the Canon's images and say, "gee I wish I had another stop or two of DR". But that's just me.

Color fidelity, sensor superiority at higher ISO and lens choices more than makes up for the low ISO DR in my World. YMMV, of course...
Logged
allegretto
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 448


« Reply #195 on: December 16, 2013, 01:31:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Heck yeah... I get it. You're far more experienced and look at things differently. It's only a hobby for me, not a living. In my field I was (retired now) very prickly about my equipment and it's output. But we all are prisoners of our lives experiences or lack thereof and my ignorance is a blessing. The glass is expensive enough!

I was reasonably happy with my D4 (as I said, high ISO is a hoot for me)  but the lugging factor was getting to me and was contemplating a new body. Got a 7100, but the smaller sensor did bug me. The D4 as backup made it livable and was about to dive deep into Nikkor glass.

But decided to go with C1 since the ability to work with files remotely on my laptop and synch is very cool for my habits. Then during the Great Migration stumbled on my old 1Ds Mk II files and was immediately arrested by the colors...! To my eye they were like fresh air and rented a 6D for a day and bought one right away. For some reason Canon colors are much more "real" to me. But it's a taste thing and modern PP makes it easy to get Canon-like colors from Nikons when someone like yourself or many here with the right experience take over.

OTOH, someone like me needs all the help they can get...


I base my need for better DR on my own experience as an editorial and commercial photographer, although I don't shoot commercially anymore.  The D800 files are more flexible and have cleaner shadows than any Canon I've used, which is meaningful to me when working the files in post.  Pulling in a blown sky on a D800 file is not an issue.  I can shoot a D800 like I did film or any of the MF backs I owned/rented.  In fact its better than the backs in many respects.

I'm not taking a dump on Canon, I still have the lenses and the color, but in reality the D800 is better for what I shoot/shot than the 5D2/3, 1ds3. 

I've never looked at sensor test data, DXO, etc in my life.  I've owned every full frame Canon, save for the 6D and 1dx.  I've used or owned every full frame Nikon, and the D200 and D2x.  I also owned or rented digi backs from the Valeo22, Sinar 54M, Aptus 75, 54s, 17, P30+ and P25.     


Logged
bcooter
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1130


Bang The Drum All Day


WWW
« Reply #196 on: December 16, 2013, 01:57:38 PM »
ReplyReply

BC,

Are you saying you have never used a D800?

Cheers,
Bernard


No didn't say that, but never extensively.  Someone had one on set,  I carry our Nikon glass usually F for one RED1 but the newer G for the Scarlet if needed as backup as I use PL for the other red one and Canon mont  for the scarlet., so anyway I tossed a g lens on a d800 and shot some with led and with hmi.

I won't buy a d800, doubt any Nikon, I just fight the color too much.

I didn't like it, but I don't like new Nikon G glass, though I love the 200 F2.   That lens is magical and much nicer than Canon's version.

Honestly I can't tell you which cameras I like right now*, because I'm tired with working huge hours.


IMO

BC


*Actually not true.  It's taken me 6 months to understand the oly em-5.   That may sound stretched but since the camera is a lab, the processor is a lab, combining the two you end up with a million settings and the olympus is sensitive.

I've done some stupid in store testing with the Sony A7 and the Olympus twice and both times the olympus produced a better file and better look, though that's stupid in store testing.

I think I now have the olympus to look as more like my m8 as any cmos camera can.

I was predisposed to buy an A7 or two since I have two zeiss A mount zooms (which I like) but regardless of what I do, the A7 file doesn't hold up in look as well as the Olympus (I know that makes no sense given the size) and it seems to have a lot of shutter slap or blur.  Kind of dissapointing but once again, this is stupid in store testing.

IMO

BC
« Last Edit: December 16, 2013, 02:18:09 PM by bcooter » Logged

MrSmith27
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #197 on: February 05, 2014, 09:44:17 AM »
ReplyReply

Wow, I almost regret my intitial criticism. Maybe I should just be happy that at least Nikon isn't releasing Hasselblad-style crap?
Logged
Theodoros
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 707


« Reply #198 on: February 05, 2014, 02:38:06 PM »
ReplyReply

Is "pure photography" relevant into using an SD card on a 3000 camera?
Logged
Isleofgough
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 8


« Reply #199 on: February 05, 2014, 02:51:58 PM »
ReplyReply

I would echo that C1 Pro gets the skin tones pretty good, unlike Lightroom (without a lot of tweaking) for the D800e
Logged
Pages: « 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad