On Nov 13, 2013, at 9:57 AM, "P.J. Alling" <webstertwenty...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Been away for a while, buried in a project. But, the Nikon Df has somehow > grabbed my attention. Probably been discussed to death here, but I can't > help wondering why? At first blush it /looks/ like a classic Nikon, but the > only thing that it's better at than say a D6xx is backwards lens > compatibility, and considering the difference in price if I were a Nikon > shooter, I'd have much preferred that they'd put that capability in a D6xx. > When you look at the details it's no more a Nikkormat or FM which it > superficially resembles than an OM-D is a classic OM-1/2/3/4.
If it were not a modern camera, it would not sell. To my eye, it looks bloated and the bevy of dials and buttons makes it look overly complicated. However, one set of comparison photos makes it clear that it's much more nearly the size of the F3 than even the D610, which is in turn a good bit trimmer than the D800 and D4. I reserve judgment until I see one in the flesh. :-) I don't know what "pure photography" was supposed to be, but if the sensor is good and the controls work well, and it takes my Nikkor 50/1.2 AI-S and Nikkor-H 85/1.8 Pre-AI allowing metering, it might present some interest for me. Not much, to be honest. I'm pretty darn happy with what I have now. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
