Which Digital SLR should I buy? I am a film only photographer since early 80's. My first camera was the Nikon F3HP and since I added the FM, FM2, FE, F4s and F5. I have a number of...

DTran

I am a film only photographer since early 80's. My first camera was the Nikon F3HP and since I added the FM, FM2, FE, F4s and F5. I have a number of Nikkor lenses for those cameras including AI, AF-D, AF-S lenses. When we moved into our current house (which is newer but much smaller) I no longer have my darkroom. I think it's time for me to take up on the digital. Since I have always used Nikon I have narrowed down my choice to the D850, D810 (I think they still sell them new), D750 and the Df. The D5 is significantly more expensive and I don't need the high frame rate or a rugged body so I don't put in in consideration. I tend to lean toward the Df because I found that I like the F3HP controls more much more than that of the F5 which is similar to most other cameras. Also I always avoided shooting in low light when a tripod is not available due to the fact film speed is very slow. I have tried Fuji 1600 before but the results were terrible. I hope with the Df I can use ISO 1600 and beyond and still have decent images.
Which camera would you recommend?

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

The Df is a fine retro looking camera with the insides of the D4. But, if you can afford Nikon's best and newest technology, go with the D850.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

DTran wrote:

I am a film only photographer since early 80's. My... (show quote)

I love my Df. Most of my lenses are AF-D

DTran

CHG_CANON wrote:

The Df is a fine retro looking camera with the insides of the D4. But, if you can afford Nikon's best and newest technology, go with the D850.

The D850 is on my list so yes I certainly can afford it. I could afford the D5 as I tend to simply buy the Nikon top of the line like the F3, F4 and F5 previously, however I am much older now and I treat my cameras much more tenderly than before and I don't need the very high speed of the D5.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

DTran wrote:

I am a film only photographer since early 80's. My... (show quote)

If low light shooting is a priority you will be amazed with the Df. I have shot it regularly at ISO 6400 & occasionally at 12,800 with excellent results. I added a grip to mine in order to have 2 batteries on board as the EN-EL14 battery is short lived compared to Nikons EN-EL15 units used in most their other better bodies. The body size and design precluded using the higher capacity battery OR dual memory cards. But with the grip I have never missed either. Great performing camera that always attracts attention when you are using it as most people believe you are still shooting film.

swartfort Loc: Evansville, IN

when I get an attack of GAS (gear acquirement syndrome) I use my google search to see what gear is vs. similar gear. It is so simple I put in the google search bar (for example) nikon d850 vs nikon df. There usually pops up first a very basic graph, but 90% of the time the next one or two search results will be from a site called camera decision. Here is a link to cut and paste for that specific result.

http://cameradecision.com/compare/Nikon-D850-vs-Nikon-Df

I like the comprehensive feature v feature comparison. AND it uses photographer "style and desire" points to set camera features against one another.

As for you ISO film vs. digital: Yes it is true that generally speaking the lower the ISO the better the sharpness of your image. HOWEVER, don't let the numbers of film confuse you. I have seen some spectacular images shot at much higher ISO that was NEVER available in film. I have just a simple intro d3400 and I am getting fantastic lower light images on a kit lens in the 3200 to 6400 ISO range. Hope this helps

pesfls Loc: Oregon, USA

I also use the DF and came from the F3HP. It’s low light capability, as others have noted, will blow you socks off compared to what you are used too. I’ve shot plenty of astro at 1600 and 3200 and not been unhappy. And the old glass compatability is exactly as advertised. They all work as stated.

rjaywallace Loc: Wisconsin

I believe you have the wrong impression of Fujifilm cameras. They can shoot at 1600, 3200, 6400 ISO and up with surprisingly minimal noise issues and excellent color rendition. On the Nikon side, the Df would be a very good choice.

DTran

rjaywallace wrote:

I believe you have the wrong impression of Fujifilm cameras. They can shoot at 1600, 3200, 6400 ISO and up with surprisingly minimal noise issues and excellent color rendition. On the Nikon side, the Df would be a very good choice.

I never used a digital cameras before, I meant the Fuji 1600 35mm color negative film. I believe they don't make it any more I tried it in the mid 80's.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

DTran wrote:

I never used a digital cameras before, I meant the Fuji 1600 35mm color negative film. I believe they don't make it any more I tried it in the mid 80's.

Yes they still make it in their Superia emulsion. And yes, its still grainy unless shot it very nice light. But that kind of defeats the purpose of 1600 film in the first place.

BebuLamar

To the OP! You make your own decision but I had the Df since Dec 2013 and love it.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

Buy either the 850 or the Df--based upon serious research and what you want in a camera.
I own and love the Df; I also use an 800E, and will probably buy an 850 in time.
The 850 and the Df are different cameras with different strengths, bells, whistles, megapixels, cropping ability, low light etc.
Crap, buy one of each and be satisfied.

DTran

Kmgw9v wrote:

Buy either the 850 or the Df--based upon serious research and what you want in a camera.
I own and love the Df; I also use an 800E, and will probably buy an 850 in time.
The 850 and the Df are different cameras with different strengths, bells, whistles, megapixels, cropping ability, low light etc.
Crap, buy one of each and be satisfied.

Thank you very much. I think it's a good idea as I would have both a camera with the most and the least number of pixels in the Nikon line up. I think I would start with the Df first and then wait to get the D850 later. Price of the D850 may drop later.

Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

DTran wrote:

Thank you very much. I think it's a good idea as I would have both a camera with the most and the least number of pixels in the Nikon line up. I think I would start with the Df first and then wait to get the D850 later. Price of the D850 may drop later.

Mac Loc: Pittsburgh, Philadelphia now Hernando Co. Fl.

DTran wrote:

Thank you very much. I think it's a good idea as I would have both a camera with the most and the least number of pixels in the Nikon line up. I think I would start with the Df first and then wait to get the D850 later. Price of the D850 may drop later.

You won't be sorry with the Df.